ill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "APR Development List"
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] APR Socket IOL
>
> > > I have an socket-like API. I need to issue my_accept(),
> > > my_setsockopt(), my_recv(), my_send()
Cc: "APR Development List"
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] APR Socket IOL
> > I have an socket-like API. I need to issue my_accept(), my_setsockopt(),
> > my_recv(),
> > my_send(), my_sendfile(), et. al. These calls are scattered all across
> I have an socket-like API. I need to issue my_accept(), my_setsockopt(),
> my_recv(),
> my_send(), my_sendfile(), et. al. These calls are scattered all across httpd.
> Are you
> saying I need an accept() filter, a recv() filter, et. al? Or that there
> needs to be a
> set of generic filter AP
On Friday 09 November 2001 06:07 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> > Not really. It just means that the network options being set on the
> > sockets directly today should instead be set (in an abstract sense) on
> > the top of the filter chain, which would propagate them down to the
> > filter that is
>
> > Just to add my (inflation-adjusted) 2 cents worth.
> > I may be way off on this but it sounds like you're attempting to move the
> > complexity
> from your
> > code down into the APR layer.
>
> Well, yea. That is the whole story behind APR. Some folks in the Apache httpd
> project
> th
> Just to add my (inflation-adjusted) 2 cents worth.
> I may be way off on this but it sounds like you're attempting to move the
> complexity
from your
> code down into the APR layer.
Well, yea. That is the whole story behind APR. Some folks in the Apache httpd
project
think APR is a bad id
Just to add my (inflation-adjusted) 2 cents worth.
I may be way off on this but it sounds like you're attempting to move the
complexity from your
code down into the APR layer. I know that you can sometimes avoid a huge mess
by making a
small change in a lower layer of code however I'd questio
> > > What you are suggesting will not work at all. There are apr_socket(and
> > > related) calls in places other than the core_*_filters. And it is not safe
> > > to make these calls (which will call BSD socket network io system calls)
> > > using descriptors from a different network interface.
>
>
>
> > On Thursday 08 November 2001 01:34 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > >
> > > What you are suggesting will not work at all. There are apr_socket(and
> > > related) calls in places other than the core_*_filters. And it is not safe
> > > to make these calls (which will call BSD socket network io sy
> On Thursday 08 November 2001 03:53 pm, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > > What you are suggesting will not work at all. There are apr_socket(and
> > > > related) calls in places other than the core_*_filters. And it is not
> > > > safe to make these calls (which will call BSD socket network io syste
On Thursday 08 November 2001 03:53 pm, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > What you are suggesting will not work at all. There are apr_socket(and
> > > related) calls in places other than the core_*_filters. And it is not
> > > safe to make these calls (which will call BSD socket network io system
> > > c
> > What you are suggesting will not work at all. There are apr_socket(and
> > related) calls in places other than the core_*_filters. And it is not safe
> > to make these calls (which will call BSD socket network io system calls)
> > using descriptors from a different network interface.
>
> Then
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 5:01 PM
> On Thursday 08 November 2001 01:34 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> >
> > What you are suggesting will not work at all. There are apr_socket(and
> > related) calls in places other than the core_*_filters. And it is not s
On Thursday 08 November 2001 01:34 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > > Sander and I both have similar requirements. Here are mine...
> > >
> > > 1. My SSL library implements socket style secure APIs (eg, secure_read,
> > > secure_write, et. al). These APIs are semantically identical to BSD
> > > socket
> On Thursday 08 November 2001 12:28 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > > On Thursday 08 November 2001 07:32 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > Comments?
> > >
> > > What is this supposed to be used for? I'm still not sure that this is
> > > necessary.
> >
> > Sander and I both have similar requ
On Thursday 08 November 2001 12:28 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 November 2001 07:32 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
>
> > > Comments?
> >
> > What is this supposed to be used for? I'm still not sure that this is
> > necessary.
>
> Sander and I both have similar requirements. Here are m
> On Thursday 08 November 2001 07:32 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > This patch is a first rough implementation of a socket iol in APR (from
> > discussions with Sander Striker a few months back).
> >
> > Public API Changes:
> > No new APIs were created.
> > apr_socket_create() has an extra parameter
On Thursday 08 November 2001 10:02 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 10:32:45AM -0500, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > > This patch is a first rough implementation of a socket iol in APR (from
> > > discussions
>
> with
>
> > > Sander Striker a few months back).
> > >
> > > Public API C
On Thursday 08 November 2001 07:32 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> This patch is a first rough implementation of a socket iol in APR (from
> discussions with Sander Striker a few months back).
>
> Public API Changes:
> No new APIs were created.
> apr_socket_create() has an extra parameter, a pointer to
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 10:32:45AM -0500, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > This patch is a first rough implementation of a socket iol in APR (from
> > discussions
with
> > Sander Striker a few months back).
> >
> > Public API Changes:
> > No new APIs were created.
> > apr_socket_create() has an extra pa
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 10:32:45AM -0500, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> This patch is a first rough implementation of a socket iol in APR (from
> discussions with
> Sander Striker a few months back).
>
> Public API Changes:
> No new APIs were created.
> apr_socket_create() has an extra parameter, a poin
Forget a new file...
/*
* The Apache Software License, Version 1.1
*
* Copyright (c) 2000-2001 The Apache Software Foundation. All rights
* reserved.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
This patch is a first rough implementation of a socket iol in APR (from
discussions with
Sander Striker a few months back).
Public API Changes:
No new APIs were created.
apr_socket_create() has an extra parameter, a pointer to an apr_socket_iol_t.
New Public Structures:
apr_socket_iol_t - contai
23 matches
Mail list logo
