[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: datagram source port?
From: |
Robert Pluim |
Subject: |
Re: datagram source port? |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Jan 2020 10:49:33 +0100 |
>>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:07:17 +0100, Robert Pluim <address@hidden> said:
>>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 17:43:46 +0200, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> said:
>>> From: Robert Pluim <address@hidden>
>>> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 11:41:41 +0100
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>>
>>> That seems fragile. Anyway, given that we have
>>> set-process-datagram-address, I donʼt see why we couldn't add
>>> set-process-datagram-source-address as well. Eli, something like this?
>>> Or we could add an optional parameter to set-process-datagram-address
>>> to mean 'set source'.
Eli> The latter, IMO, because the code is very similar.
Robert> OK. Iʼve fixed a very embarassing bug with IPv6, and need to test it
Robert> with a datagram process in server mode. Iʼve added it to my long
list
Robert> for this weekend (but itʼs vacation time, which helps :-)
I took another quick look at this, and noticed that the windows port
doesn't support datagram sockets at all, although the underlying
Winsock does. Is there a reason for that?
Robert
- Re: datagram source port?,
Robert Pluim <=