| To: | rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Rusty Russell) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] SO_ORIGINAL_DST and sockaddr_in |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:27:19 +0300 (MSK) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <E14VQsF-0007fj-00@halfway> from "Rusty Russell" at Feb 21, 1 07:45:00 am |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > Is there a point in allowing a too-big buffer? I know that > getpeername() and getsockname() do, but it's an indication of an error > on the user code, to me. Please, look into specs. F.e. unix98. Austin group has some draft too. getsockopt() must work not depending on buffer size. If buffer is too short, it must truncate. In length filed it must return size of object (not size of copied data), if I remember correctly. Alexey |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] SO_ORIGINAL_DST and sockaddr_in, Harald Welte |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: usagi ipv6 and linux source, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] SO_ORIGINAL_DST and sockaddr_in, horape |
| Next by Thread: | [no subject], Richard Guy Briggs |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |