On 06/18/2018 02:17 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:50:19AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
>> On 06/14/2018 05:18 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:44:52AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
Per the note in the TLS ULP (which is actually a generic
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:50:19AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 06/14/2018 05:18 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:44:52AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> >> Per the note in the TLS ULP (which is actually a generic statement
> >> regarding ULPs)
> >>
> >> /* The TLS
On 06/14/2018 05:18 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:44:52AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
>> Per the note in the TLS ULP (which is actually a generic statement
>> regarding ULPs)
>>
>> /* The TLS ulp is currently supported only for TCP sockets
>> * in ESTABLISHED state.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:44:52AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> Per the note in the TLS ULP (which is actually a generic statement
> regarding ULPs)
>
> /* The TLS ulp is currently supported only for TCP sockets
> * in ESTABLISHED state.
> * Supporting sockets in LISTEN state will require
Per the note in the TLS ULP (which is actually a generic statement
regarding ULPs)
/* The TLS ulp is currently supported only for TCP sockets
* in ESTABLISHED state.
* Supporting sockets in LISTEN state will require us
* to modify the accept implementation to clone rather then
* share