Ron Frederick <r...@timeheart.net> added the comment: That'd be great if you could add AbstractServer to the 3.7 docs - thanks!
Regarding the other issue, I'm already set up to use multiple asyncio.Server objects to deal with the shared port issue and it's working fine. It did mean duplicating a handful of lines of code from asyncio to iterate over the getaddrinfo() results (creating one asyncio.Server per sockaddr instead of letting asyncio create a single asyncio.Server with multiple listening sockets) and there are some other minor details like cleaning up if the kernel-selected dynamic port chosen for the first interface is not actually free on all other interfaces, but I'm not actually looking for any changes in how that's working right now. Here's the code I'm referring to if you're curious: https://github.com/ronf/asyncssh/blob/master/asyncssh/listener.py#L192 ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue25749> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
