Re: SSL_set_fd() harmful when using nonblocking sockets?

2002-10-31 Thread Dan Kegel
I believe I have seen the OS return 0 on a 2nd read even when not at EOF. I'll try to come up with a test case to demonstrate it. (See http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DB8738F.2000409%40kegel.com for a related thread.) - Dan "Noel Burton-Krahn" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh... Dan, read() alw

Re: SSL_set_fd() harmful when using nonblocking sockets?

2002-10-27 Thread Noel Burton-Krahn
sets errno=EAGAIN. read()==0 alwats means EOF. --Noel - Original Message - From: "Dan Kegel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 1:13 PM Subject: SSL_set_fd() harmful when using nonblocking sockets? > With Unix nonblocking s

SSL_set_fd() harmful when using nonblocking sockets?

2002-10-26 Thread Dan Kegel
With Unix nonblocking sockets, the only way to detect that the connection has shut down is to check for a zero return from read after poll or select says the socket is ready for reading. (Read will cheerfully return zero at any time if you call it again after a fully successful read(), so only the