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
I see Jonathan Bresler took it (today).
wow dude! put me on the spot or something!
jmb
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
On Tue, 4 Jul 2000, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Yeah, something like that. The question is who is going to fix it? INET6
issues should probably stay in sync with other BSDs and KAME, and
therefore IMHO the maintainer of inet6 code should step out and fix
it... (Hello?? :)
Hmm. Good point.
On Sun, 2 Jul 2000, Kelly Yancey wrote:
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,
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
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
