Mike "Ford" Ditto writes: > Perhaps we should add a new privileged bind option that allows binding > to an address that the local stack doesn't yet know it is allowed to > use, with the understanding that no packets will be passed until the > address does get assigned, a state that can already be reached by taking > away an address while something is bound to it.
As long as you can't actually use it on the wire when transmitting packets or receive any packets sent to that address until such an interface is configured, I don't quite see why that needs to be a privileged option at all. It sounds like a "use consistent rather than POSIX bind semantics" flag. ;-} -- James Carlson, KISS Network <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
