Re: [dev] [sdhcp] Part 1/3 Bugs

2018-11-14 Thread Sean MacLennan
On Wed, 14 Nov 2018 17:13:15 -0800
Michael Forney  wrote:

> On 2018-11-12, Sean MacLennan  wrote:
> > I am surprised you are getting away with binding the socket to the
> > broadcast address.  
> 
> I found in ip(7):
> 
> INADDR_BROADCAST (255.255.255.255) means any host and has the same
> effect on bind as INADDR_ANY for historical reasons.
> 
> So that explains why it worked.

Interesting. I obviously hit a case where it doesn't, but that could
be a bug on my side.

> BTW, is there going to be a part 3/3?
> 

Part 3/3 relies heavily on part 1/3 being accepted ;)

Cheers,
   Sean



Re: [dev] [sdhcp] Part 1/3 Bugs

2018-11-14 Thread Michael Forney
On 2018-11-12, Sean MacLennan  wrote:
> I am surprised you are getting away with binding the socket to the
> broadcast address.

I found in ip(7):

INADDR_BROADCAST (255.255.255.255) means any host and has the same
effect on bind as INADDR_ANY for historical reasons.

So that explains why it worked.

BTW, is there going to be a part 3/3?