> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Elz <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 1:43 PM
> To: Schwarz, Konrad (CT RDA IOT SES-DE) <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: system() and pthread_atfork()
> 
>     Date:        Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:13:04 +0000
>     From:        "Schwarz, Konrad" <mailto:[email protected]>
>     Message-ID:  
> <mailto:a45b1767f1002449a37508c2cc6003d7172c9...@defthw99em4msx.ww902.siemens.net>
> 
>   | I actually feel this problem is out-of-scope for POSIX: compliant machines
>   | are not supposed to dynamically change their IP addresses at run-time.
> 
> I have no idea what (if anything) POSIX says about IP networking 
> requirements, but I'd expect not much, but that
> (if it were stated
> somewhere) would be an error.
> 
> [DHCP is allowed to dynamically change addresses]

Captain Obvious here:
A minimal quality of implementation attribute for DHCP daemons is for
these addresses to remain fixed for as long as possible.
Cf. https://kb.isc.org/docs/isc-dhcp-44-manual-pages-dhcpdleases,
which is designed to persist address assignments across restarts,
e.g., because the hosting server needs to reboot.

Or are you suggesting applications must be (re-)coded
such that they are resistant to dynamic changes of IP addresses?
 
> All that said, I agree that anything related to this issue would be out of 
> scope for POSIX, but the more general
> problem of threaded applications (which it must be, that's the only way that 
> the process can be simultaneously
> closing & opening sockets, while also, unknown to itself, also forking)
> and the interactions wrt fork & threads, is a POSIX issue.   That the
> actual problem is networking related is just a side issue, I believe.

The point I was trying to make with the text you did not quote is that
if the OP had been more judicious in closing sockets/file descriptors,
he would not have run into the problem in the first place.

This seriously undermines the case for an all new F_CLOFORK flag and associated
paraphernalia.  Indeed, except for Solaris, no implementation has ever
implemented this, presumably because there is no real-world need for it.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to