Yes, .listen(0) followed by .address().port is what I meant by " use an ephemeral port" :-)
~Ryan On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 at 18:05 Greg Reimer <[email protected]> wrote: > That seems reasonable. I see nothing about working with "ephemeral ports" > in the node/iojs docs, but suspect server.listen(0) (which listens on a > "random" port) and then then connecting to whatever's in server.address() > would be the way to do that. Assuming there isn't a better way I'll give > that a try. > > Thanks! > > On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 12:29:59 PM UTC-6, Ryan Graham wrote: > >> If you only plan on using it from within the process, you could use an >> ephemeral port binding, which shouldn't "tie up" a useful TCP port. >> >> ~Ryan >> >> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 at 09:02 Greg Reimer <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Basically, it would be nice to be able to create a server object that I >>> could have in memory and connect to directly (for proxying purposes) >>> *without* tying up a socket file or a TCP port. >>> >>> I've been looking for a way to do this for a while actually, and it >>> seems like it should be possible in principle, but have had no luck finding >>> an example. Maybe it simply isn't possible? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Greg >>> >> -- Job board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ New group rules: https://gist.github.com/othiym23/9886289#file-moderation-policy-md Old group rules: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nodejs/CAGjmZGzp6Eh1saQ9WHJOmpHwfAQTRrfUs-%3DekWe0_BSuQanciQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
