Uwe Klein wrote:
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>> Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
>> This is probably what is causing the problems in bug #135 and bug #716.
>> If this true then it's a bug in the IP stack of the O/S and should get
>> fixed. IPv6 addresses are unrelated to IPv4 addresses and should never
>> be mixed. Such attempts to do so cause many problems and this is just
>> one symptom. You should get your O/S vendor to address the problem. I
>> will try one thing and try and bind the IPv6 wildcard address (::) first
>> and then the IPv4 address (0.0.0.0) but I don't know if that will really
>> make a difference if this is badly architected by the O/S.
> 
> does this look any different when you do a :
> 
>       setsockopt(sock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR,.....
> 
> before any binding to that local port?
> 
> G!
> uwe

This would be wrong architecturally this one is an IPv4 socket and the
other an IPv6 socket.

Danny
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions

Reply via email to