[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200805132006.35010.rdenis@simphalempin.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 20:06:34 +0300
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <rdenis@...phalempin.com>
To: David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [DCCP]: Deprecate SOCK_DCCP in favour of SOCK_DGRAM
Le Tuesday 13 May 2008 19:59:35 David Stevens, vous avez écrit :
> Well, SOCK_STREAM/IPPROTO_DCCP then. :-) But it isn't really that
> either, as Remi said.
> If you do a connect() on a UDP socket, it doesn't cease to
> be a SOCK_DGRAM socket, so I don't really care about that distinction,
> but if others do, that's ok with me. There are ACKs here, too, so maybe.
But connect() is a _non-blocking_ operation which merely sets the _default_
destination (you can still sendto() someone else).
Using socket types blindly may also break applications using
getsockopt(SO_TYPE), if they exists (I think I wrote one once...) to
determine how to use a socket.
SOCK_DCCP was perhaps a bad idea, but SOCK_DGRAM seems worse. In the end, it's
more a matter of patching libc getaddrinfo than changing the kernel API
anyway. Did AIX not have a similar socket type as DCCP under a more generic
name by the way?
--
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net/
--
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