lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:25:00 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: stefan@...lof.de Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, simon@...e.lp0.eu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: sockets affected by IPsec always block (2.6.23) From: Stefan Rompf <stefan@...lof.de> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 19:39:07 +0100 > I'd strongly suggest doing so. AFAIK, behaviour of connect() on nonblocking > sockets is quite well defined in POSIX. You are entitled to your opinion. POSIX says nothing about the semantics of route resolution. Non-blocking doesn't mean "cannot sleep no matter what". > If this is changed for some IP sockets, event-driven applications > will randomly and subtly break. If this was such a clear cut case we'd have changed things a long time ago, but it isn't so don't pretend this is the case. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists