On 2018-07-03, Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-07-01, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote:
>> Gregory Ewing <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz>:
>>
>>> I don't see how the address-reuse timeout can be a security measure,
>>> because the process trying to take over the address can easily
>>> circumvent it by setting SO_REUSEADDR.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Nevertheless, the later socket object cannot unilaterally take over a
>> socket using SO_REUSEADDR. The earlier socket object must have set the
>> same option previously.
>
> On what OS? In my experience, that's not true on Linux or BSD Unix.
I was wrong. I just did a quick test on Linux, and it works the way
Marko Hauhamaa describes. [Don't have handy access to a BSD system at
the moment.]
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I'm wearing PAMPERS!!
at
gmail.com
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
