[489] in linux-net channel archive
Re: CONFIG_INET_SNARL: What for?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Craig Metz)
Wed Jun 14 09:08:58 1995
To: Michael Shields <shields@tembel.org>
CC: linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 13 Jun 1995 20:22:26 GMT."
<m0sLcTj-000DYFC@yage.tembel.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 06:59:55 -0500
From: Craig Metz <cmetz@sundance.itd.nrl.navy.mil>
In message <m0sLcTj-000DYFC@yage.tembel.org>, Michael Shields writes:
>> CONFIG_INET_SNARL selects whether to use the netmask of a device (set by
>> ifconfig) or the IP-class-default netmask (i.e. 255.255.255.0 for a class C
>> address) for figuring out which MTU to use for TCP.
>
>With CIDR the two high bits are no longer meaningful.
Correct.
>There is no longer
>any such thing as inherent "class C".
Bzzt. Wrong. CIDR is a Proposed Standard. Not to be confused with the
way things may or may not work. Classed addressing is not about to go away
any time soon.
>CONFIG_INET_SNARL should be removed.
Yes, but it only when the real solution to the problem it solves, Path
MTU Discovery, goes in.
-Craig
PS: This is really sad. Two people now proposing we get rid of a
perfectly nasty hack without at least trying to figure out what it does. UTSL.
