Scott Miller writes: > You're right, it shouldn't be a big code change. I've been holding off > on it because there seems to be some disagreement on how hop limiting in > particular should work - dropping excessive paths completely, counting > already-used hops against the limit, or (like it does now) just capping > the remaining hops. And then there's the exception of the WIDE1-1 behavior.
Instead of changing the way HOPLIMIT works, why not just add a new command such as HOPMAX? Shouldn't take much memory. -- Bob Poortinga K9SQL <http://www.linkedin.com/in/bobpoortinga> Bloomington, Indiana US
