From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Sun Dec 18 02:20:28 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6957BC830E9 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 02:20:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@digiware.nl) Received: from smtp.digiware.nl (smtp.digiware.nl [176.74.240.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 355F268B for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 02:20:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@digiware.nl) Received: from router.digiware.nl (localhost.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23AAF33442; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 03:20:19 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digiware.com Received: from smtp.digiware.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by router.digiware.nl (router.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6a7Sz2Wx5j9I; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 03:20:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.10.10] (asus [192.168.10.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 91EB933441 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 03:20:18 +0100 (CET) To: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" From: Willem Jan Withagen Subject: binding by different process on the same port Message-ID: <896832c9-7d63-cd9a-b0e9-7ad32e90568a@digiware.nl> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 03:20:16 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 02:20:28 -0000 Hi, I thought that the following was not (easily) possible? wjw ceph-osd-1 93349 14 tcp4 *:6804 *:* wjw ceph-osd-0 93336 43 tcp4 127.0.0.1:6804 *:* Or is it due to: - using SO_REUSEADDR - the fact that one address is more specific than the other and as such they are considered different? --WjW