On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 08:45:25PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 2026-07-18 20:03, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 09:32:43PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > >> On 02/14/2017 08:17 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>> Okay, let me chime in here. > >> > >> That's great, thanks. > >> > >>> AI_ADDRCONFIG seems to be the Wrong Thing[TM]. > >>> AI_PASSIVE seems to be the Right Thing[TM]. > >> > >> And you even seem to agree with me, that's still greater :-) > > > > Was this patch ever applied? I see set_sock_addr still uses > > hints.ai_flags = AI_CANONNAME | AI_ADDRCONFIG; > > > > Maybe another solution got applied? I'd love to close the bug on the > > Debian side. > > Would it be possible to see if b2c36a0b5ab71ff4abb1e321ba05064ea333177b solves > the problem?
So I don't know what Uwe had in mind back when suggesting the GAI changes. However when trying commit b2c36a0b5ab71ff4abb1e321ba05064ea333177b now, per its description, it should be possible to pick any address and tftpd should then listen on it? I think these situations should basically be the same: * as described in the bug, an IP address is not assigned *yet* to the interface * my test scenario, I picked an IP address that I did not assign to any interface In my test scenario, tftpd with commit b2c36a0b5ab71ff4abb1e321ba05064ea333177b applied still does not start, instead it gives: in.tftpd: cannot bind to local IPv4 socket: Cannot assign requested address Now I should probably test this on a system that has *no* IPv4 address at all, to see if that makes a difference. But that's a bit harder right now. >From my understanding of how other programs work, to really support binding to an address that is not yet assigned to an interface, bind() also needs setsockopt IP_FREEBIND first. Thanks for working on this! Best, Chris
