On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 03:04:53PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:07:57PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> >> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wr
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:07:57PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>> >> > On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
>> >>
...
> > >> the reason this was added is to have a specified way to allow a system to
> > >> behave like a client and server making use of the INIT collision.
> > >>
> > >> For 1-to-many style sockets you can do this by creating a socket,
> > >> binding it,
> > >> calling listen on it and trying to
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:07:57PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> >> > On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Marcelo
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>> > On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
>> >> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -040
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 04:09:31PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> > On 21. May 2018, at 15:48, Neil Horman wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> >>> On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Mar
> On 21. May 2018, at 15:48, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>>> On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, N
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> > On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> >>> On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:
> On 21. May 2018, at 13:39, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
>> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
This feature is actually already supporte
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 10:54:04PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > > This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
> > > set by SO_REUSEAD
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
>> On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>> > This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
>> > set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it'
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
>> On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>> > This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
>> > set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it'
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 08:50:59PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
> > set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it's not working exactly as RFC6458 demands in
> > section 8.1.27, like:
On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
> set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it's not working exactly as RFC6458 demands in
> section 8.1.27, like:
>
> - This option only supports one-to-one style SCTP sockets
>
On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Xin Long wrote:
> This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
> set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it's not working exactly as RFC6458 demands in
> section 8.1.27, like:
>
> - This option only supports one-to-one style SCTP sockets
> - This s
On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 03:44:40PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
> set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it's not working exactly as RFC6458 demands in
> section 8.1.27, like:
>
> - This option only supports one-to-one style SCTP sockets
> -
This feature is actually already supported by sk->sk_reuse which can be
set by SO_REUSEADDR. But it's not working exactly as RFC6458 demands in
section 8.1.27, like:
- This option only supports one-to-one style SCTP sockets
- This socket option must not be used after calling bind()
or sctp
17 matches
Mail list logo