Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

See my comments below,
Best regards
Michael

Michael Tüxen Tel.: +49 89 722 47210
Siemens AG Fax: +49 89 722 48212
ICN WN CS SE 51 E-mail:
Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Schruefer Wolfgang
> [SMTP:Wolfgang.Schruefer AT icn.siemens.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 2:55 PM
> To:
> 'discussion AT sctp.de'
> Subject: AW: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP-API: Pointer instead of
> AssociationID
>
> Thanks for your reply, Michael!
>
> An array index reaches the same goal, but I am not really happy about this:
>
> 1) Is it one array for every instance? Then SCTP hase the problem to
> identfy the instance.
[Tuexen Michael] Right.
> 2) Is it one array for all instances? Then the ULP has a problem with its
> array size...
> [Tuexen Michael] Why? The array is in the SCTP engine, not
in the ULP.
> 3) The maximum number of associations must be fixed, or the array must be
> expandable. (is this easy to realize?)
[Tuexen Michael] Yes, that's UNIX. You can resize arrays
dynamically in Common Lisp, in C ...
> 4) A check for a valid pointer seems easy to me:
> - e.g. the pointer itself is stored in the assoc data and this can be
> checked.
> - Or (that's my favorite!) in the API-functions both pointers are handed
> over, so everybody can check it and the caller identifies himself (may be
> helpful for debugging).
[Tuexen Michael] Sounds good, I was missing a check,
therefor I suggested the array.
> Viele Grüße
> Wolfgang Schrüfer
>
> **************************************
> Wolfgang Schrüfer SIEMENS AG
> ICN WN CC EKJ 14 TEL: 722-61646
> mailto:Wolfgang.Schruefer AT icn.siemens.de
> **************************************
>
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Tuexen Michael
> > [SMTP:Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de]
> > Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 14. Februar 2001 13:02
> > An:
> > 'discussion AT sctp.de'
> > Betreff: RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP-API: Pointer instead of
> > AssociationID
> >
> > Seems reasonable for me, but if the ULP uses a wrong pointer
> > you probabily modify some important part of your memory ...
> > What about having an array of the assoc data (or at least an
> > array of pointers to these data) and use an index. Than you
> > can do at least some array index bounds checking.
> > I think that is a good thing for an API.
> > Happy SCTPing
> > Michael
> >
> > Michael Tüxen Tel.: +49 89 722 47210
> > Siemens AG Fax: +49 89 722 48212
> > ICN WN CS SE 51 E-mail:
> > Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Schruefer Wolfgang
> > > [SMTP:Wolfgang.Schruefer AT icn.siemens.de]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 11:12 AM
> > > To:
> > > 'discussion AT sctp.de'
> > > Cc: Raisch Juergen
> > > Subject: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP-API: Pointer instead of AssociationID
> > >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > we have a future requirement to handle 12000! associations at one
> > > machine.
> > >
> > > So I thought about the search algorithm to get the data related to a
> > > single association, which is necessary for the most function calls
> > > between ULP and SCTP.
> > >
> > > But at the interface SCTP <> ULP any searching could be avoided if
> > > there is a possibility to define an association via address.
> > >
> > >
> > > Idea:
> > > The function sctp_associate returns the address of the
> > > SCTP-association-data-structure.
> > > A new parameter announces the ULP-association-data-structure to sctp,
> > > e.g.:
> > >
> > > void *sctp_associate ( ...
> > > ..., void *ULP_association)
> > >
> > > For all API-functions the associationID can be replaced by the pointer
> > > to the association of the called layer.
> > >
> > >
> > > Would this be a way to go for?
> > >
> > > Viele Grüße
> > > Wolfgang Schrüfer
> > >
> > > **************************************
> > > Wolfgang Schrüfer SIEMENS AG
> > > ICN WN CC EKJ 14 TEL: 722-61646 >
> > > mailto:Wolfgang.Schruefer AT icn.siemens.de
> > > **************************************
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > discussion mailing list
> > > discussion AT sctp.de
> > > http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> > _______________________________________________
> > discussion mailing list
> > discussion AT sctp.de
> > http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> discussion AT sctp.de
> http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion

---

• [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP-API: Pointer instead of AssociationID, Schruefer Wolfgang, 02/14/2001
  • <Possible follow-up(s)>
  • RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP-API: Pointer instead of AssociationID, Tuexen Michael, 02/14/2001
  • RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP-API: Pointer instead of AssociationID, Tuexen Michael, 02/14/2001

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.