On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:24 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote: > > I've been thinking about doing exactly this after I've been knee-deep > > in the DNS code. > > It may not be a bad idea to have generic udp/tcp incoming/outgoing > > addresses which can then be over-ridden per-"protocol". > > > > WTF? We discussed this months ago and came to the conclusion it would be > good to have a two layered outgoing address/port assignment. > > a) base default of random system-assigned outbound address port. > > b) override per-component/protocol in/out bound address/port with > individual config options.
No need to panic! Looks like everybody is on the same page and it does not really matter how many times that same page gets written :-). Start a Feature page, perhaps? Cheers, Alex. P.S. My fix is unrelated to all of that. It was just a typo bug. > > 2008/9/9 Amos Jeffries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> revno: 9176 > >>> committer: Alex Rousskov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> branch nick: trunk > >>> timestamp: Mon 2008-09-08 17:52:06 -0600 > >>> message: > >>> Fixed typo: Config.Addrs.udp_outgoing was used for the HTCP incoming > >>> address. > >>> modified: > >>> src/htcp.cc > >>> > >> > >> I think this is one of those cleanup situations where we wanted to split > >> the protocol away from generic udp_*_address and make it an > >> htcp_outgoing_address. Yes? > >> > >> Amos > >> > >> > >> > > >
