login
Header Space

 
 

Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - 12:49 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Andi Kleen wrote:

I quoted the standard and it does not say anything about AF_UNSPEC.  So
you cannot simply make such broad statements.

I also don't say that this behavior should be removed.  It's certainly
useful, very much so in fact.

But the spec calls for a "null address" to be used and that's in my
understanding something different from using AF_UNSPEC.

I looked through Stevens TCP Illustrated Vol 2 and it seems not to
mention resetting the address at all.  The POSIX spec certainly got this
text from .1g.

I cannot test it on other systems.  If somebody has access to some
certified systems (and maybe others), write a bit of code which creates
a DGRAM socket, connect to one address, call connect with a "null
address", then connect to another address (which likely has to use a
different interface since otherwise the connect will just succeed, it
seems).

- --
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG8VMF2ijCOnn/RHQRAr9NAJwLxyql0kQnMGJNaPZlRGsuB6rGEACgog88
WIWAFhuBWsjps7PdbcoumUQ=
=oLxP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Ulrich Drepper, (Wed Sep 19, 11:21 am)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Andi Kleen, (Wed Sep 19, 11:47 am)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Ulrich Drepper, (Wed Sep 19, 12:49 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Andi Kleen, (Wed Sep 19, 1:26 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Ulrich Drepper, (Wed Sep 19, 1:46 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Alan Cox, (Wed Sep 19, 2:06 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Andi Kleen, (Wed Sep 19, 1:57 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Ulrich Drepper, (Wed Sep 19, 2:02 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Andi Kleen, (Wed Sep 19, 2:30 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Rick Jones, (Wed Sep 19, 2:38 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, , (Wed Sep 19, 4:33 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Andi Kleen, (Wed Sep 19, 3:40 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, David Miller, (Wed Sep 19, 12:52 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Ulrich Drepper, (Wed Sep 19, 1:04 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Ulrich Drepper, (Wed Sep 19, 1:27 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, David Miller, (Wed Sep 19, 12:15 pm)
Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX, Alan Cox, (Wed Sep 19, 12:39 pm)
speck-geostationary