Followup to: <20001023223209.A847@ping.be>
By author: Kurt Roeckx <Q@ping.be>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 03:58:39PM -0400, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
> > "David S. Miller" <email@example.com> writes:
> > > SOCK_DGRAM over AF_UNIX is reliable, it's a local transport.
> > This is contrary to the documentation ("man socket"). The behavior
> > you describe is what I would expect for SOCK_SEQPACKET, not
> > SOCK_DGRAM.
> SOCK_DGRAM is only as reliable as the underlying protocol. If the
> unerlying one is not reliable, neither is SOCK_DGRAM. It will not
> do anything to make it more reliable, unlike others.
Again, SOCK_DGRAM is reliable over AF_UNIX, because AF_UNIX does not
implement any nonreliable transports.
-- <firstname.lastname@example.org> at work, <email@example.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:14 EST