From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <5d4b3c6f92f111cbfc05f983cdf7b065@vitanuova.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Multi-stack mail problem.
From: C H Forsyth <forsyth@vitanuova.com>
In-Reply-To: <4447df5b1d0853c0dd0f099400dd8b95@collyer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="upas-ixqszgokdmwwampwrrxcteomhz"
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:07:27 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 57567ee0-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--upas-ixqszgokdmwwampwrrxcteomhz
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

i'm not sure it would have helped (much).  the checksums are in different
locations even between tcp and udp.  why must you change the checksum?
well ....

--upas-ixqszgokdmwwampwrrxcteomhz
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu>
Received: from punt-3.mail.demon.net by mailstore
	for forsyth@vitanuova.com id 1A4H1k-0007Fb-AD;
	Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:43:15 +0000
Received: from [130.203.4.6] (helo=mail.cse.psu.edu)
	by punt-3.mail.demon.net with esmtp id 1A4H1k-0007Fb-AD; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:42:40 +0000
Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001)
	id 8749419B2F; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:42:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.16.6])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP
	id 36B7D19BBD; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:42:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Original-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001)
	id 0437F19BAD; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:41:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from collyer.net (venti.collyer.net [63.192.14.226])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 13ADD19B00
	for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:41:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4447df5b1d0853c0dd0f099400dd8b95@collyer.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Multi-stack mail problem.
From: Geoff Collyer <geoff@collyer.net>
In-Reply-To: <968b6a09adf6724f3bdd4525efee97a1@vitanuova.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu>
List-Archive: <https://lists.cse.psu.edu/archives/9fans/>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 02:41:33 -0700
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO
	version=2.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)

oh, and NAPT is what seemed to mess up IL for me.  IP itself doesn't
contain port numbers and, as i recall, IL put its port numbers at
different offsets in the packet than TCP and UDP did.
--upas-ixqszgokdmwwampwrrxcteomhz--