James Carlson wrote:

>Sebastien Roy writes:
>  
>
>>This fasttrack is being submitted for two specific behavior changes:
>>    
>>
>
>Are there any <netinet/in.h> macro changes to go along with this
>  
>
Yes there is. Here is the difference between onnv and the fixed version:

nptbld-x-52% diff -c /ws/onnv-clone/usr/src/uts/common/netinet/in.h in.h
*** /ws/onnv-clone/usr/src/uts/common/netinet/in.h      Tue Oct 30 
23:09:28 2007--- in.h        Fri Nov  2 06:47:15 2007
***************
*** 328,337 ****
--- 328,348 ----
  #define       IN_CLASSD_NET           0xf0000000U     /* These aren't 
really */
  #define       IN_CLASSD_NSHIFT        28              /* net and host 
fields, but */
  #define       IN_CLASSD_HOST          0x0fffffffU     /* routing 
needn't know */
+
+ #define       IN_CLASSE(i)    (((i) & 0xf0000000U) == 0xf0000000U)
+ #define       IN_CLASSE_NET           0xffffffffU
+
  #define       IN_MULTICAST(i)         IN_CLASSD(i)

+ /*
+  * We have removed CLASS E checks from the kernel
+  * But we preserve these defines for userland in order
+  * to avoid compile  breakage of some 3rd party piece of software
+  */
+ #ifndef _KERNEL
  #define       IN_EXPERIMENTAL(i)      (((i) & 0xe0000000U) == 0xe0000000U)
  #define       IN_BADCLASS(i)          (((i) & 0xf0000000U) == 0xf0000000U)
+ #endif

  #define       INADDR_ANY              0x00000000U
  #define       INADDR_LOOPBACK         0x7F000001U

>What will inet_lnaof(), inet_netof(), and inet_makeaddr() do when
>faced with Class E addresses?
>
>I'm not sure this change is fully specified.
>
>  
>
I had discussed this issue with Erik Nordmark(he is being cced).,  He 
advised against changing code in the above functions as they are 
classful code ( given Class E is being defined as Classless)

Sangeeta

Reply via email to