Re: Routing Socket and New Addresses

2002-01-28 Thread Andrew
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Justin C.Walker wrote: It is and it is :-}. At least, Stevens discusses it in Unix Network Programming, v1, 2e (sec. 20.3). Different systems, alas, treat this case differently. My section 20.3 is on UDP Datagram Trunctation...did you mean 17.3 (Routing Sockets:

Re: Routing Socket and New Addresses

2002-01-28 Thread Justin C . Walker
On Monday, January 28, 2002, at 05:03 PM, Andrew wrote: On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Justin C.Walker wrote: It is and it is :-}. At least, Stevens discusses it in Unix Network Programming, v1, 2e (sec. 20.3). Different systems, alas, treat this case differently. My section 20.3 is on UDP

Re: Routing Socket and New Addresses

2002-01-27 Thread Andrew
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Andrew wrote: configured I get a RTM_NEWADDR message. The bit I'm confused with is the struct sockaddr associated with RTA_IFA (that I assumed would hold the IP of the interface) has an sa_family value of AF_IMPLINK. If I cast it to a struct sockaddr_in then s_addr is

Re: Routing Socket and New Addresses

2002-01-27 Thread Andrew
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Andrew wrote: but it seems that if I don't read the packet with one read call then the packet is lost. Is this correct behaviour? I guess if the buffer is small Well it seems that if you dont get the entire packet in one read it is lost forever. It also seems that no

Re: Routing Socket and New Addresses

2002-01-27 Thread Justin C . Walker
On Sunday, January 27, 2002, at 08:03 AM, Andrew wrote: On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Andrew wrote: but it seems that if I don't read the packet with one read call then the packet is lost. Is this correct behaviour? I guess if the buffer is small Well it seems that if you dont get the entire