On 14/06/18(Thu) 14:07, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:59:30AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > > I'm not sure if I like this reachover from in_pcbconnect to > > in6_pcbconnect. It is a bit of a layer violation from the old times. > > Would be nice if those INET6 specifix reacovers could be removed from the > > low level INET functions in the long run. In this regard this feels a bit > > like a step back. > > I am a bit unsure in which direction to move.
IMHO everything that reduces the IPv4 vs IPv6 ifdef maze in TCP/UDP/etc is the way to go. That's why I ok'ed your previous diff.
