| To: | Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [patch] in.tftpd and aliased interfaces |
| From: | Fabio Olive Leite <olive@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:33:08 -0300 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20000727121913T.yoshfuji@cerberus.nemoto.ecei.tohoku.ac.jp>; from yoshfuji@ecei.tohoku.ac.jp on Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 12:19:13PM +0900 |
| References: | <20000726155216.M18562@conectiva.com.br> <20000727121913T.yoshfuji@cerberus.nemoto.ecei.tohoku.ac.jp> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.2i |
Hi there, On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 12:19:13PM +0900, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI wrote: ) In article <20000726155216.M18562@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Wed, 26 Jul 2000 15:52:16 -0300), Fabio Olive Leite <olive@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> says: ) ) > If the server binds to 10.0.17.26, everything works ok. Since tftp uses ) > udp, we can't obtain (AFAIK, pleased to be proved wrong on this) the IP ) > that the client used to reach us and bind to that, so that things would ) > work fine without any odd changes. What I did to solve this is a small ) ) IP_PKTINFO for IPv4 / IPV6_PKTINFO for IPv6 ? Sorry, I don't get it. Are those sockoptions or ioctls I should use? -- ( Fábio Olivé Leite -- Conectiva HA Team -- olive@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ) ( PPGC/UFRGS MSc candidate -- Advisor: Taisy Silva Weber ) ( Linux - Distributed Systems - Fault Tolerance - Security - Pizza ) |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: TCP/IP implementation, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [patch] in.tftpd and aliased interfaces, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [patch] in.tftpd and aliased interfaces, 吉藤英明 |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [patch] in.tftpd and aliased interfaces, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |