Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-03 Thread Fastream Technologies
Hello, We use TStringList quicksort/binary search routine I wrote for caching--works so well that I can recommend. Also, has anybody tested the IPv6 with listening/server components? Best Regards, SZ On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Francois PIETTE francois.pie...@skynet.bewrote: How

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-03 Thread Arno Garrels
Fastream Technologies wrote: Hello, We use TStringList quicksort/binary search routine I wrote for caching--works so well that I can recommend. With many entries all TList-derrived classes are dog-slow compared with binary search trees for this purpose! Also, has anybody tested the IPv6

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-03 Thread Fastream Technologies
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Arno Garrels arno.garr...@gmx.de wrote: Fastream Technologies wrote: Hello, We use TStringList quicksort/binary search routine I wrote for caching--works so well that I can recommend. With many entries all TList-derrived classes are dog-slow compared

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-03 Thread Arno Garrels
Fastream Technologies wrote: We use TStringList quicksort/binary search routine I wrote for caching--works so well that I can recommend. With many entries all TList-derrived classes are dog-slow compared with binary search trees for this purpose! We are using Sorted=true; while adding

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-03 Thread Francois PIETTE
We use TStringList quicksort/binary search routine I wrote for caching--works so well that I can recommend. With many entries all TList-derrived classes are dog-slow compared with binary search trees for this purpose! Confirmed. I recently had a project with such issue. The result where

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-02 Thread Fastream Technologies
Hello, Has the IPv6 async DNS resolving issue been resolved? How many socket/threads? Best Regards, SZ On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Arno Garrels arno.garr...@gmx.de wrote: Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote: FTP also still not supporting IPv6 FTP needs the EPRT and EPSV

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-02 Thread Arno Garrels
Arno Garrels wrote: Fastream Technologies wrote: Hello, Has the IPv6 async DNS resolving issue been resolved? How many socket/threads? There is a (hopefully) thread-safe new class which provides async lookups. One global object of this class is allocated in unit initialization with the

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-02 Thread Fastream Technologies
Hello, On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Arno Garrels arno.garr...@gmx.de wrote: Arno Garrels wrote: Fastream Technologies wrote: Hello, Has the IPv6 async DNS resolving issue been resolved? How many socket/threads? There is a (hopefully) thread-safe new class which provides async

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-02 Thread Fastream Technologies
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Arno Garrels arno.garr...@gmx.de wrote: Arno Garrels wrote: Fastream Technologies wrote: Hello, Has the IPv6 async DNS resolving issue been resolved? How many socket/threads? There is a (hopefully) thread-safe new class which provides async

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-02 Thread Arno Garrels
Fastream Technologies wrote: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Arno Garrels arno.garr...@gmx.de wrote: Arno Garrels wrote: Fastream Technologies wrote: Hello, Has the IPv6 async DNS resolving issue been resolved? How many socket/threads? There is a (hopefully) thread-safe new class

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-06-02 Thread Francois PIETTE
How fast/slow this implementation works with thousands of concurrent requests is of course untested. One DNS lookup may take one or even multiple seconds in the worst case. Shouldn't TWSocket have his own internal cache for DNS lookup ? Or maybe instead of more complex TWSocket, maybe a

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-30 Thread Arno Garrels
Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote: FTP also still not supporting IPv6 FTP needs the EPRT and EPSV commands to support IP6: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ftpext-ftp-over-ipv6-01 from 1998, but IP6 has been slow arriving. The latest version of Serv-U supports these IP6

[twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Arno Garrels
Hi, When new property SocketFamily is set to sfAny method DnsLookup may now return a list containing both IPv4 and IPv6 strings. Looks like Windows always returns IPv6 first. The top item is also copied to string FDnsResult. Should I change this order? BTW.: I wrote some helper classes to

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Fastream Technologies
Not sure if it is the same issue but with our proxy server code with many threads, the debugger sometimes gives AV on Wndproc when step run too. SZ On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Arno Garrels arno.garr...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, When new property SocketFamily is set to sfAny method DnsLookup

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Francois PIETTE
When new property SocketFamily is set to sfAny method DnsLookup may now return a list containing both IPv4 and IPv6 strings. Looks like Windows always returns IPv6 first. The top item is also copied to string FDnsResult. Should I change this order? An idea: Give the opportunity for the

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Arno Garrels
RTT wrote: Is happening here too, but only if I continue with the step over debugging (F8) after the 4 thread are created. Never happened while they are created. No idea if that's what you want to say with repeat pressing F8 until the AV is raised. The debugger will keep stepping the WmTest

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Francois PIETTE
I made a very simple test case which triggers the AV on different hardware and Windows versions in both D7 and D2010 here. However some German testers were not able to reproduce the issue, very strange. I cannot reproduce the issue. I'm using Vista Ultimate 32 bit with all services packs

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Francois PIETTE
Currently I made one breaking change that IMO cannot be prevented without tons of workaround code. That is type change of TCustomWSocket public field/property sin from TSockAddrIn to TSockAddrIn6. TSockAddrIn6 can be passed to all old functions by typ casting it to TSockAddrIn and passing the

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Arno Garrels
Fastream Technologies wrote: Maybe it is another 64-bit Windows/debugger API issue? I am using Win7 Pro x64 and had been using 64-bit XP and Vista for 4 years... I do not think it's related to 64-Bit Windows. I tested and got the AV with Delphi 7 and Delphi 2010 on XP-Pro SP3 (fully patched),

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Fastream Technologies
I said so because I had faced a WinXP/Vista x64 issue (BLUE SCREEN) which MS fixed in Win7. I thought it might be something similar. BTW, did you see the message I sent to you privately? It's been a while since I heard back from you to my replies and I am beginning to think that it could be a spam

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Arno Garrels
Fastream Technologies wrote: I said so because I had faced a WinXP/Vista x64 issue (BLUE SCREEN) which MS fixed in Win7. I thought it might be something similar. BTW, did you see the message I sent to you privately? It's been a while since I heard back from you to my replies and I am beginning

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Arno Garrels
Fastream Technologies wrote: Ok, no problem. BTW, we are very interested in OpenSSL accelerators It's already included as an experimental feature since a while, however there was zero feedback from developers owning accelerator hardware yet. All you need to test is a system with an accelerator

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Francois PIETTE
Turned out to be more work than initially planned. Maybe we should create a svn branch for it? What makes you think another branch would be useful ? -- francois.pie...@overbyte.be http://www.overbyte.be -- To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list please goto

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Arno Garrels
Francois PIETTE wrote: Turned out to be more work than initially planned. Maybe we should create a svn branch for it? What makes you think another branch would be useful ? Better testing before it's finally commited to the main branch. I did some general cleanup including removal of all old

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Francois PIETTE
Turned out to be more work than initially planned. Maybe we should create a svn branch for it? What makes you think another branch would be useful ? Better testing before it's finally commited to the main branch. OK, go on. -- francois.pie...@overbyte.be The author of the freeware

Re: [twsocket] IPv6 implementation details

2010-05-29 Thread Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
FTP also still not supporting IPv6 FTP needs the EPRT and EPSV commands to support IP6: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ftpext-ftp-over-ipv6-01 from 1998, but IP6 has been slow arriving. The latest version of Serv-U supports these IP6 commands. I did check with my ISP about IP6,