On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 11:43:01PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > (mutt hiccupped. You might see this twice.) > > Kurt Roeckx <k...@roeckx.be>: > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 12:14:35PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > > > and the other is ripping out all > > > the interface-scanning stuff so we lose the dependency on > > > getifaddrs(3) and use wildcard interfaces only. > > > > Are you sure this is going to work? As far as I know there are (or > > were) good reasons to do this, but I can't remember them > > currently. But it's at least something that's specific to UDP. > > If you can remember a blocker, please tell us about it before I > put a large amount of work into this. > > A little Googling found this from 2012: > > https://blog.powerdns.com/2012/10/08/on-binding-datagram-udp-sockets-to-the-any-addresses/
That at least matches my understanding of things. And since a nameserver seems to be using it, it should be possible to get it to work. So 1 question I have is if you care about Windows or not. Kurt _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
