Messages in this thread | | | From | David Schwartz <> | Date | Mon, 29 Apr 2002 03:38:22 -0700 | Subject | Re: Possible bug with UDP and SO_REUSEADDR. |
| |
>However, I still can't see any *practical* use of having one program >(me) bind the port, deliberately share it, and another program (you) >coming along and want to share it, and then all unicast datagrams are >passed to you. Not If I haven't subscribed to any multicast addresses, >and no one is sending bcasts, there is no point of me being alive. > >Can you come up with a real life situation where this make sense?
Absolutely. This is actually used in cases where you have a 'default' handler for a protocol that is built into a larger program but want to keep the option to 'override' it with a program with more sophisticated behavior from time to time. In this case, the last socket should get all the data until it goes away.
DS
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |