On 2008-02-27, Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2008-02-26, Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> 7stud, what you seem to be missing, and what I'm not sure if anyone has
>>> clarified for you (I have only skimmed the thread), is that in TCP,
>>> connections are uniquely identified by a /pair/ of sockets (where
>>> "socket" here means an address/port tuple, not a file descriptor).
>>
>> Using the word "socket" as a name for an address/port tuple is
>> precisely what's causing all the confusion. An address/port
>> tuple is simply not a socket from a python/Unix/C point of
>> view, and a socket is not an address/port tuple.
>
> FWIW, the word was used to mean the address/port tuple (RFC
> 793) before there was ever a python/Unix/C concept of
> "socket".
I could claim I was innocently unaware of that usage, though I
have read the RFCs, so I'll go with Steve Martin's classic
excuse: "I forgot."
> And I totally agree that it's confusing; but I submit that
> IETF has a stronger claim over the term than Unix/C/Python,
> which could have just stuck with "network descriptor" or some
> such. ;)
They probably had to come up with a system call name that was
uniquely identified by six characters or something like that.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Does someone from
at PEORIA have a SHORTER
visi.com ATTENTION span than me?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
