Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Boucher
> [mailto:marc+sctp AT mbsi.ca]
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:19 AM
> To:
> discussion AT sctp.de
> Subject: Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?
>
>
> let's not reinvent the wheel
>

Even though it didn't sound like it, I actually agree with you and don't
like the idea of passing addresses around as ascii data. I'm just trying to
understand the portability requirements of this interface.

If the interface is to be extremely portable, then it should probably follow
the guidelines that stack providers seem to follow. The interface provides
definition for all of the data types that it uses, even the basics such as
8,16,32 bit ints, etc.

If the interface is to be slightly less portable, but more familiar to most,
then it should probably rely on some of the popular standardized data types.
Personally, I'm happy with func(sockaddr *addr, int addr_len) where addr
points to either a sockaddr_in or sockaddr_in6. This would also seem to be
in line with the sctp socket draft standard. As for the other data types
used by the interface, it would seem reasonable to assume the POSIX 1003.1g
definitions for intN_t, uintN_t, size_t, etc.

What are the portability requirements of this interface?



> On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 08:15:47AM -0400, Wagner, Joel wrote:
> > How about a compromise? Use a struct that contains the IP
> address as it is
> > represented on the net. This would: a) keep conversions to
> a minimum, b)
> > work equally well for IPv4 and IPv6, c) make it easy to
> translate to/from
> > various target required structs such as sockaddr_in, sockunion, etc.
> >
> > The struct could look something like:
> >
> > typedef struct {
> > char ipa_bytes[IPA_MAX_ADDR_SIZE];
> > int ipa_length;
> > } IPaddress;
> >
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> discussion AT sctp.de
> http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>

---

• Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, (continued)
  • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Andreas Jungmaier, 04/04/2001
  • RE: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Coene Lode, 04/04/2001
    • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Marc Boucher, 04/05/2001
      • Re(2): [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Michael Tüxen, 04/05/2001
        • Re: Re(2): [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Marc Boucher, 04/05/2001
      • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Andreas Jungmaier, 04/05/2001
        • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Marc Boucher, 04/05/2001
          • [SCTP-Discussion] Strings vs. Sockunion, Andreas Jungmaier, 04/05/2001
  • RE: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Wagner, Joel, 04/05/2001
    • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Marc Boucher, 04/05/2001
  • RE: [SCTP-Discussion] Is the timer_list initialised?, Wagner, Joel, 04/05/2001

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.