> This still won't do a uniform application, because the router machine
> itself won't get the attribute, since NAT only affects machines
> *other than* the router.  (From an aesthetic perspective, that's very
> `dirty'.  8-)

Yes, it is, but the right fix to it is to fix ipnat.  I know if I were
doing NAT, I'd want the NAT machine itself to get natted when using its
"inside" address.

Perhaps ipfilter might be the right place?  Or does it not rewrite
packets at present?

> But in any case, this kind of attribute belongs on the interface or
> routing tables, where real uniform processing of data happens.

As long as it's done in a way that doesn't bloat things for people who
don't want it (for example, anything that has to go in a common
codepath should disappear completely in the absence of "options
MSS_CLAMPING_KLUDGE" (or whatever it's called)).

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B