> >    To address this problem, an IP_BROADCAST_TTL socket option is proposed.
 > >    This option will be identical to the existing stable IP_MULTICAST_TTL
 > >    socket option, but will apply to broadcast traffic. 
 > 
 > is there some reason we can't simply extend IP_MULTICAST_TTL to also
 > cover broadcast traffic?

As per the manpage, it only applies to multicast datagrams on the socket.
Having it also apply to broadcast traffic would break that promise.  Aside
from that, I still think IP_BROADCAST_TTL is clearer, both in semantics
and in the code.

-- 
meem

Reply via email to