On 03/08/2016 10:25 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote:
I have chosen FreeListen over the flags
FWIW, should be take the YAD path, I'd prefer ListenFree (over
FreeListen) to emphasize on the "Listen directive family" with a
prefix...
Thinking more about this, I think I second Jim on the wish to have a
single Listen directive with some parameter like
"options=freebind,backlog:4095,reuseport,...".
Thinking about right syntax for options...
I would personally like something like "Listen [IP-address:]portnumber
[protocol] [option1] [option2] ...". Do we have list of supported
protocols by Listen directive, or we support whatever protocol is there?
If we have explicit list of protocols, then the protocols itself could
become an options.
If not, can it be acceptable, that you always have to define protocol
when you wan to use options?
Otherwise I can always implement Yann's idea with "Listen
[IP-address:]portnumber [protocol] [options=[option1,option2,...]]".
Regards,
Jan Kaluza
We could then whatever (new) IP option more easily (less docs work...)
and maybe deprecate ListenBacklog.
For example, the "reuseport" (SO_REUSEPORT) option seem to be usable
w/o the current buckets mechanism in latest linux kernels, so indeed
we may add more and more options there...
