On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Bea Lam wrote:
I'd like to set the serverfd because I'm developing an API for RFCOMM and
OBEX communication. The ideal approach would be to allow the programmer to
create a RFCOMM server socket, bind to an available port, and then use that
socket for either RFCOMM or OBEX communication as they see fit. This seems
more flexible and customisable than running an OBEX server on a port
designated through the openobex api. And since OBEX communication has an
underlying RFCOMM channel, and RFCOMM channels can be started on
user-designated ports, it seems to makes sense for my api to allow OBEX
services to be run on user-designated ports too.
What's wrong with providing
start_rfcomm_server(int port);
start_obex_server(int port);
in the API?
Where is the extra flexibility in allowing the application programmer to
create a socket himself, exactly?
Alexander
Homepage: http://www.sensi.org/~ak/
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Openobex-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openobex-users
