Bug: improperly bound listen addresses?
grarpamp
grarpamp at gmail.com
Sat Aug 16 04:35:19 UTC 2008
> Okay. However, one of us is confused: you keep referring to a
> connection, yet the code you quoted above shows socket() called specifying
> SOCK_DGRAM, which means UDP, a connectionless protocol.
Forget about protocol. The socket()'s have been either
bind()'ed or connect()'ed. And thust they show up with
endpoints. That's what I'm referring to.
> >That 'bind [local]' would honor a new -DNSClientAddress option.
> >And optionally a new -DNSClientPort option. And since the name
> >'resolv.conf' confusingly implies use of the normal system resolver
> >routines, some clarity regarding its actual usage could be added
> >to the docs.
> Perhaps we could get Nick's and Roger's thoughts on that. My guess,
> though, is that their plates may still be overflowing with far higher
> priority issues, though perhaps it could be added to the wish list for
> the (probably far) future.
Was hoping for more discussion. Maybe I'll just open some
'bugs', now that the few things I noted are a bit narrower,
and leave them as placeholders. Wish there was a way to edit
the flyspray entries.
More information about the tor-talk
mailing list