Re: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-10 Thread Wes Peters
now would be only putting mutex, anyway. sure enough, name6.c says: /* * TODO for thread safe * use mutex for _hostconf, _hostconf_init. * rewrite resolvers to be thread safe */ now, i'd say that it's fairly important for some form of threadsafe name resolution to exist

threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Greg Thompson
mutex, anyway. sure enough, name6.c says: /* * TODO for thread safe * use mutex for _hostconf, _hostconf_init. * rewrite resolvers to be thread safe */ now, i'd say that it's fairly important for some form of threadsafe name resolution to exist. until the KAME code is fixed, how about

Re: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Dan Moschuk
be only putting mutex, anyway. | | sure enough, name6.c says: | | /* | * TODO for thread safe | * use mutex for _hostconf, _hostconf_init. | * rewrite resolvers to be thread safe | */ | | now, i'd say that it's fairly important for some form of threadsafe name | resolution to exist. until

RE: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Charles Randall
: threadsafe name resolution | i've just received confirmation from the author of the KAME resolution code | that it isn't at all thread safe: | | Sure. As noted in name6.c, thread related stuff is not implemented yet. | Since our resolver code based on bind4 doesn't aware thread safeness, | all I can

Re: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Mike Bristow
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:07:01PM -0600, Charles Randall wrote: Is there a reason that ADNS won't work for this? Firstly, adns doesn't do IPv6 (at least not yet, according to the web page you gave). Secondly, I'm not sure if it's thread safe (although being nice 'n async it's not hard to use

RE: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Greg Thompson
From: Charles Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there a reason that ADNS won't work for this? http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/adns/ in addition to the other reasons mentioned, it won't work for me because it's not a part of the os. as an application developer, i'd expect the basic

Re: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
as long as nothing other than getipnodebyname and byaddr share resources with those two, i'm safe if i just throw a mutex around my calls to byname/addr. unfortuantely, this solution gets the "big suck" rating. if the operating system ships with mechanisms that are documented as being

Re: threadsafe name resolution

2000-08-09 Thread Dan Moschuk
| Is there a reason that ADNS won't work for this? | | http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/adns/ Technically, no. Morally, it's GNU. :-) -- Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when he is called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason. --