On Sun, 2 Jul 2000, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:

> Hi,
> While working on adding dynamic sysctls support, I discovered something
> that looks like a bug.
> For kernels that have both INET and INET6, three sysctl entries (rtexpire,
> rtminexpire, rtmaxcache) are registered twice - both in netinet/in_rmx.c
> and netinet6/in6_rmx.c.
> It seems they should be registered only once, within a section that is
> common to INET and INET6.
> Andrzej Bialecki

  I think the real problem is that the rtexpire, rtminexpire, and rtmaxcache
variables are each declared static in netinet/in_rmx.c and again in
netinet6/in6_in6_rmx.c. Do we really need separate learned route expiration
times for ip4 and ip6? If the answer is yes, then the solution should be to
move the ip6 versions under the net.inet.ip6 sysctl tree.
  Otherwise, as you suggest, rtexpire and friends need to be common (maybe
directly under net.inet?)

  By the way, while we are talking about sysctl, I don't suppose you would be
willing to review/commit PR 15251? It is a fairly straightforward patch that
fixes a number of signed-ness bugs with sysctl as well as fix certain sysctl
variables to use the correct data type (mostly an issue when ints and longs
are different sizes). Thanks,


Kelly Yancey  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -  Belmont, CA
System Administrator, eGroups.com                  http://www.egroups.com/
Maintainer, BSD Driver Database       http://www.posi.net/freebsd/drivers/
Coordinator, Team FreeBSD        http://www.posi.net/freebsd/Team-FreeBSD/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to