Thx. I'll take a deeper look post 2.4.19 (this week)
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 4:36 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 03/08/2016 11:43 AM, Jan Kaluža wrote:
>> 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?
>
> I've implemented the way described in that question above ^. Please see the
> attached patch and share your opinions.
>
> The syntax to enable IP_FREEBIND currently is:
>
> Listen 192.168.0.1:80 http freebind
>
> Regards,
> Jan Kaluza
>
>>
>> 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...
>>>
>>
>
> <httpd-trunk-listen-options.patch>
