Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> writes:
> On 2016/06/15 19:43, Vincent Gross wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:49:01 +0200
>> Vincent Gross <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > While validating source address inside selection functions is the
>> > right direction, I don't think it would be a good thing to extend
>> > further in_selectsrc() prototype. However it is easy to add a check
>> > while processing cmsg.
>> >
>> > rev2 below. Ok ?
>> >
>>
>> rev3 below.
>>
>> I fixed the line length, the useless bzero(), and also the wording in
>> ip.4
>>
>> Ok ?
>
> Basically yes but one observation.
I also gave my ok to vgross by IM.
I know that some concerns have been exposed privately, I was not Cc'd,
thus I have no idea what is the current status of that discussion. To
the people concerned, please keep me / us updated about that discussion
and Cc us.
>> Index: sys/netinet/in.h
>> ===================================================================
>> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet/in.h,v
>> retrieving revision 1.115
>> diff -u -p -r1.115 in.h
>> --- sys/netinet/in.h 20 Oct 2015 20:22:42 -0000 1.115
>> +++ sys/netinet/in.h 15 Jun 2016 17:37:11 -0000
>> @@ -307,6 +307,7 @@ struct ip_opts {
>> #define IP_RECVRTABLE 35 /* bool; receive rdomain w/dgram */
>> #define IP_IPSECFLOWINFO 36 /* bool; IPsec flow info for dgram */
>> #define IP_IPDEFTTL 37 /* int; IP TTL system default */
>> +#define IP_SENDSRCADDR 38 /* struct in_addr; source address
>> to use */
>
> Other OS with this have it at the same value as IP_RECVDSTADDR.
> Not doing that currently breaks net/gdnsd - I can take care of that
> but I just wanted to flag it up as a difference to other implementations.
>
> So as long as that doesn't cause any concern, OK sthen@, and I will take
> care of bumps etc as necessary in ports.
I think it would be better to match what other implementations (FreeBSD)
do. I can't think of a negative impact.
--
jca | PGP: 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
