[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: proposal: inetd improvements.
On 1275508087 seconds since the Beginning of the UNIX epoch
Dennis Ferguson wrote:
>On 2 Jun 2010, at 03:16 , elric%imrryr.org@localhost wrote:
>> 4. % should be defined as an address type and it should expand
>> into a list of IP addresses which is periodically regenerated
>> by iterating over the interfaces,
>I'm curious what the purpose of this is? The reason I'm asking is that
>doing this can just really, really suck on routers which have large
>interface configurations (I've seen them with a number of interfaces
>configured which overflowed a 16 bit interface index).
>Since this may introduce a scaling issue in some (admittedly far corner
>case) applications it might be better to avoid it by instead fixing the
>thing that makes you want to do that, even if you don't care about
>the corner case.
It's specifically for UDP wait services where the client expects
the server to answer from the same IP address to which it sent the
request. E.g. named or krb5kdc.
Roland Dowdeswell http://Imrryr.ORG/~elric/
Main Index |
Thread Index |