Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Miller wrote:
> It just occured to me that AF_UNSPEC might be used simply
> because "all zeros" might be a valid real bindable address
> for some address family.  And using AF_UNSPEC avoids that
> problem entirely.

Yes, but for IPv4/6 it's not an issue.  Some implementations might
handle all-zeros and the spec _currently_ calls for it.  In this case an
alignment would be good.

I guess I'll just go ahead and file a problem report with the spec.
Maybe the Unix vendors will test their implementations in provide feedback.

- --
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG8Vam2ijCOnn/RHQRAlw2AJwPCkD/GdX5YWCjsidhNXkGT71SiQCeLUDX
XimSWS2NMI9T8QxnnV3FDQ4=
=8XbG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux