Well, that’s what the code does now, as far as I can tell.

enohp ym morf tnes
-----------
Dan Wilcox
danomatika.com
robotcowboy.com


> On Mar 25, 2019, at 11:32 AM, Christof Ressi <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > For connectionless sending essentially, I think we would need to forego the 
> > call to connect() in netsend_connect and keep a copy of the socket address 
> > struct
>  
> IIUC, 'connect' on a UDP sockket does exactly that: it doesn't really 
> "connect" to anything but just stores the default destination address, so 
> 'connect' + 'send' is equivalent to 'sendto'.
> at least that's how it has always worked for me.
>  
> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/connect.2.html
>  
> Christof
>  
> Gesendet: Montag, 25. März 2019 um 10:59 Uhr
> Von: "Dan Wilcox" <[email protected]>
> An: "Chris McCormick" <[email protected]>
> Cc: pd-dev <[email protected]>
> Betreff: Re: [PD-dev] netsend/netreceive UDP ignore ECONNREFUSED
> Sure, however neither netsend nor udpsend work this way, so I was first 
> trying to see what I could do without changing the internals a whole lot. 
> It's definitely not "connectionless" when it keeps returning to a receiver...
>  
> For connectionless sending essentially, I think we would need to forego the 
> call to connect() in netsend_connect and keep a copy of the socket address 
> struct to use with sendto() instead of send() when actually sending. Since 
> sendto() takes the address directly, it doesn't need a connect() ahead of 
> time. Also, the UDP netsend / netreceive relay behavior could then use 
> sendto() and recvfrom().
>  
> So conceptually, the current behavior of calling connect() for both UDP and 
> TCP needs to change and I'd think then the the "connected" outlet for UDP 
> simply means the socket is set up, but has no connotation for a current 
> "connection." Again, I'm not sure how that would affect patches which would 
> rely on the old behavior...
>  
> On Mar 25, 2019, at 3:42 AM, Chris McCormick <[email protected]> wrote:
>  
> Hi Dan,
> 
> On 23/3/19 5:56 am, Dan Wilcox wrote:
> From my reading on the socket API, sending a UDP message conceptually 
> shouldn't care about whether the receiver is there. However this is detected 
> on a lower networking layer and propagated up to the application layer where 
> it can be used or ignored.
> 
> You probably know this already but it is possible to operate UDP in 
> connectionless or connection-oriented mode. Connection-oriented is somewhere 
> between TCP and connectionless. In connection-oriented mode I suppose you 
> would want to know if the other side is there or not, whereas with 
> connectionless you probably just want to fire and forget. Not sure if this 
> affects what you are doing but might help explain what you're seeing.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris.
> 
> --
> https://mccormick.cx/
> 
> My tech development newsletter:
> https://mccormick.cx/subscribe
>  
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>  
> _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list 
> [email protected] https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev

Reply via email to