On 19/01/18 16:32, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Matt Caswell wrote:
> > Please raise a separate PR for this work. It *must* be portable though
> > and work across all our platforms (e.g. including VisualC etc). My
> > suggestion is that your BIO_CTRL_DGRAM_GET_ADDR/BIO_CTRL_DGRAM_SET_
Matt Caswell wrote:
> Please raise a separate PR for this work. It *must* be portable though
> and work across all our platforms (e.g. including VisualC etc). My
> suggestion is that your BIO_CTRL_DGRAM_GET_ADDR/BIO_CTRL_DGRAM_SET_ADDR
> ctrls should return an error on platforms th
On 17/01/18 16:34, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> > It seems like a fairly simple solution could solve this. Currently we
> > have BIO_dgram_get_peer() which returns the peer's address for the last
> > message read from a BIO. You could imagine a new call being introduced
> > to g
Matt Caswell wrote:
>> Matt Caswell wrote:
>> >> Matt Caswell wrote: >> a) when the existing FD is
>> >> connect(2) any future traffic to the bound >> port will get rejected
>> >> with no port. So the application really has to >> open a new socket
>> >> first. The applicat
On 17/01/18 16:34, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Matt Caswell wrote:
> >> Matt Caswell wrote: >> a) when the existing FD is
> >> connect(2) any future traffic to the bound >> port will get rejected
> >> with no port. So the application really has to >> open a new socket
> >> f
Matt Caswell wrote:
>> Matt Caswell wrote: >> a) when the existing FD is
>> connect(2) any future traffic to the bound >> port will get rejected
>> with no port. So the application really has to >> open a new socket
>> first. The application can do this two ways: it can >> open
On 16/01/18 19:44, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Matt Caswell wrote:
> >> a) when the existing FD is connect(2) any future traffic to the bound
> >> port will get rejected with no port. So the application really has to
> >> open a new socket first. The application can do this two
Matt Caswell wrote:
>> a) when the existing FD is connect(2) any future traffic to the bound
>> port will get rejected with no port. So the application really has to
>> open a new socket first. The application can do this two ways: it can
>> open a new socket on which to receive
On 16/01/18 15:32, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> a) when the existing FD is connect(2) any future traffic to the bound port
>will get rejected with no port. So the application really has to open a
>new socket first.
>The application can do this two ways: it can open a new socket on
please see https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/5024
mattcaswell asks on github:
mattcaswell> I am unclear about the underlying premise of this PR:
mcr> This patch refactors the DTLSv1_listen() to create an
mcr> alternative API that is called DTLSv1_accept().
mcr> DTLSv1_ac
10 matches
Mail list logo