Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Evgeniy Polyakov
Date: Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 10:40 am

On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 01:35:56PM -0400, Alan Cox (alan@redhat.com) wrote:

Yes, of course, bind conflict can be handled in different way as Ulrich noted - 
from checking bind bucket, to request remote node if address is in use or not.

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
bind and O_NONBLOCK, Ulrich Drepper, (Thu Sep 20, 10:59 pm)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Evgeniy Polyakov, (Sat Sep 22, 9:14 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Ulrich Drepper, (Sat Sep 22, 9:21 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Evgeniy Polyakov, (Sat Sep 22, 9:59 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Ulrich Drepper, (Sat Sep 22, 10:11 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Evgeniy Polyakov, (Sat Sep 22, 10:19 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Alan Cox, (Sat Sep 22, 10:35 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Evgeniy Polyakov, (Sat Sep 22, 10:40 am)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, David Miller, (Sat Sep 22, 10:58 pm)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, Alan Cox, (Sun Sep 23, 1:43 pm)
Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK, David Miller, (Fri Sep 28, 3:56 pm)