Darren Reed writes: > James Carlson wrote: > >I could go along with this _if_ there's a commitment to repair the > >interface before changing the stability. "Repair" would mean that > >either the flags operate as intended, or that the interface itself is > >removed. > > > > > > Are you taking to task the setting of both bits as a way of saying > "I know it's not unicast, but I can't decide if it is multicast/broadcast" > or something else?
Yes. It puts the burden on the client to figure out what that means and opens up a new possibility that wouldn't happen with the original BSD interface, and one that doesn't seem to make semantic sense. Filters written to match just "broadcast" would also match all L2 multicast messages, even though that's clearly not what was wanted. That result seems to me to be architectural. It's a limitation in the defined interface that ends up limiting the possible things the client of that interface can do. As a project (or consolidation) private issue, I still think it's a touch broken, but I don't think I care much. If it's aiming to end up as non-private one day, then it's a loose end that needs to be resolved before that day. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
