On Mar 8 16:23, Noel Grandin wrote: > On 2013-03-08 15:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >You can call connect on both sides. But ultimately you're right, I > >guess. I never thought about it that way, and it seems nobody used > >AF_LOCAL datagrams so far. Weird. The problem is that the > >underlying protocol is AF_INET because Windows doesn't support > >AF_LOCAL. > > If you're using UDP as your underlying protocol, UDP already > contains a port you can reply to.
Yes, but the port isn't available to the application which opened a AF_LOCAL connection. If recvfrom returns an AF_INET name, it's rather tricky to convert it into an AF_LOCAL name for a subsequent sendto call. [...time passes...] Or... are you suggesting that recvfrom returns some kind of fake AF_LOCAL name, which can be converted back to AF_INET by sendto on the fly? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
