Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> > -.I IP_RECVTTL
> > +.I IP_TTL
> 
> So is it the case that this option was just wrongly named in the 
> original page, or is the change here reflective of something that 
> has changed in the kernel?  (It doesn't look like the latter is 
> true, but I thought it better to check.)

AFAIK it isn't changed, I just discovered it while trying to use it
that although socket option is IP_RECVTTL, I didn't receive ancillary
data with this type as expected. Instead of this there was data with
type IP_TTL.
 
> >  control message with the time to live
> >  field of the received packet as a byte. Not supported for
> >  .B SOCK_STREAM
> > @@ -789,6 +789,20 @@ received datagrams. Linux has the more g
> >  .I IP_PKTINFO
> >  for the same task.
> >  .PP
> > +Some BSD sockets implementations also provide
> > +.I IP_RECVTTL
> > +option, but ancillary message with type
> > +.I IP_RECVTTL
> > +is passed with incoming packet. It's different from
> > +.I IP_TTL
> > +used in Linux.
> 
> From reading the sources, Linux appears to have both 
> IP_RECVTTL and IP_TTL.  So, does there not also need
> to be some documentation of the "real" IP_RECVTTL?

You seems to be confused ;). In short:

1) IP_TTL socket option is to _set_ TTL for outgoing packets.
2) IP_RECVTTL socket option is to _get_ TTL with incoming packets as
   ancillary data. But this ancillary data structure doesn't have type
   IP_RECVTTL (as many would expect, imho), but IP_TTL.

> > +.PP
> > +Using
> > +.I SOL_IP
> > +socket options level isn't portable, BSD-based stacks use
> > +.I IPPROTO_IP
> > +level.
> 
> Recently (not yet published), I went though ip(7), tcp(7), udp(7) 
> etc, and changed SOL_IP to IPPROTO_IP, SOL_TCP to IPPROTO_TCP, 
> etc, on the basis that
> 
> -- the IPPROTO_* constants are what appear in POSIX, and

That's good enough reason, IMHO.


-- 
Hasso Tepper
Elion Enterprises Ltd.
WAN administrator
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to