On 31 Aug 2010, at 14:25, Andre Oppermann wrote: >>> I'm not entirely comfortable with this change, and would like a chance to >>> cogitate on it a bit >>> more. While I'm not aware of any applications depending on the semantic >>> for TCP, I know that >>> we do use it for UNIX domain sockets. Since it's a documented API, if we >>> are going to remove >>> it, then we need to go through a deprecation process, not least by marking >>> it as a deprecated >>> API in 8.x before having it vanish in 9.0. > > >> sendto() is also used for SCTP SOCK_STREAMS and SOCK_SEQPACKET sockets... > > sendto() will not be touched or modified. It's just that on a TCP socket > the tcp protocol will not perform an implied connect anymore. The only thing > that changes is TCP dropping a deprecated and experimental extension and > behaving like every other UNIXy OS. > > sendto() will continue to work for UDP, SCTP and Domain sockets and whoever > else currently supports it, except TCP.
Right -- I think you're missing the thrust of this objection: it's a standard part of the FreeBSD API that sendto(2) with an address implicitly connects across all over our protocols, so making TCP be the only exception seems counter-productive. What is it that will actually be accomplished by removing this functionality, other than reducing the number of lines of code in tcp_usr_send by a couple of dozen? Robert_______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
