On 2013-03-08 16:37, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
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?
Yup, sorry, friday afternoon, not being very good with the explaining thing.
It's obviously a localhost connection, so we only need a way of stashing
and retrieving the port number, not the host part.
--
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
