<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This analysis makes sense - I think using memcmp is clearly wrong here.
Yeah, now that I think about it, we're betting on the kernel to
faithfully zero all unused bits in addrinfo structures. In an ideal
world, all kernels would do that, but in the real world it seems like
a losing bet.
I could go for Jan's idea of putting a random key into the messages,
if anyone feels that we should not trust to the kernel to enforce the
packet source address restriction. But the memcmp() test seems a clear
loser given today's discussions.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
