On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Mike Lovell, le Mon 01 Apr 2013 00:35:03 -0600, a écrit :
> > On 03/08/2013 05:47 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > >Samuel Thibault, le Fri 08 Mar 2013 10:08:55 +0100, a écrit :
> > >>There does exist some unique address, which is ret
Mike Lovell, le Mon 01 Apr 2013 00:35:03 -0600, a écrit :
> On 03/08/2013 05:47 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >Samuel Thibault, le Fri 08 Mar 2013 10:08:55 +0100, a écrit :
> >>There does exist some unique address, which is returned by recvfrom,
> >>I'll have a look at how to get access to it.
> >Ah
On 03/08/2013 05:47 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Samuel Thibault, le Fri 08 Mar 2013 10:08:55 +0100, a écrit :
There does exist some unique address, which is returned by recvfrom,
I'll have a look at how to get access to it.
Ah, no, it's not unique... It's just the host IP address and the same
po
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 09:01:52PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 06 Mar 2013 13:29:37 +0100, a écrit :
> > > What do people think about it?
> >
> > We should fix the layer that introduces the problem. Therefore I think
> > the fix needs to be net/socket.c.
> >
> > Unfor
Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 06 Mar 2013 13:29:37 +0100, a écrit :
> > What do people think about it?
>
> We should fix the layer that introduces the problem. Therefore I think
> the fix needs to be net/socket.c.
>
> Unfortunately net/socket.c does not have the concept of a link-layer
> address, so w
Samuel Thibault, le Fri 08 Mar 2013 10:08:55 +0100, a écrit :
> There does exist some unique address, which is returned by recvfrom,
> I'll have a look at how to get access to it.
Ah, no, it's not unique... It's just the host IP address and the same
port as the multicast address, so it'll be the s
Stefan Hajnoczi, le Fri 08 Mar 2013 09:43:18 +0100, a écrit :
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 06:14:28PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Stefan Hajnoczi, le Thu 07 Mar 2013 10:38:26 +0100, a écrit :
> > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 02:15:25PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 0
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 06:14:28PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Stefan Hajnoczi, le Thu 07 Mar 2013 10:38:26 +0100, a écrit :
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 02:15:25PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 06 Mar 2013 13:29:37 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 0
Stefan Hajnoczi, le Thu 07 Mar 2013 10:38:26 +0100, a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 02:15:25PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 06 Mar 2013 13:29:37 +0100, a écrit :
> > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 05:35:10PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Unfortunately net/socket.c
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 02:15:25PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 06 Mar 2013 13:29:37 +0100, a écrit :
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 05:35:10PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Unfortunately net/socket.c does not have the concept of a link-layer
> > address, so we cannot ea
Stefan Hajnoczi, le Wed 06 Mar 2013 13:29:37 +0100, a écrit :
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 05:35:10PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > The reason why IPv6 does not work when using -net socket,mcast=foo is
> > that since qemu explicitly sets IP_MULTICAST_LOOP to 1, it receives its
> > own frames. Whe
11 matches
Mail list logo
