cvs commit: src/lib/libc/net sctp_sys_calls.c src/sys/sys param.h

Julian Elischer julian at
Fri Dec 15 11:53:29 PST 2006

Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>> i think Andre's question was this:
>> normally we use {set|get}sockopt() to configure the socket
>> as desired for special features (e.g. multicast is one).
> It already does. These are wrappers, not actual syscalls.
>> Why is it undesirable to use the same kind of overloading
>> for sctp ?
> An API is specified for SCTP already. Being forced to shoehorn all 
> possible semantics into a getsockopt()/setsockopt() call *sucks* for 
> serious work.

why? The API says it can be implemented via a set of library entry 
points. How would you tell the difference?

> Regards,

More information about the cvs-src mailing list