From owner-freebsd-net  Mon Feb 12 16:51:57 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from InterJet.dellroad.org (adsl-63-194-81-26.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.194.81.26])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2AF37B684
	for <net@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:51:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from curve.dellroad.org (curve.dellroad.org [10.1.1.30])
	by InterJet.dellroad.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA92368;
	Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:51:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from archie@localhost)
	by curve.dellroad.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA72498;
	Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:51:48 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from archie)
From: Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>
Message-Id: <200102130051.QAA72498@curve.dellroad.org>
Subject: Re: [itojun@iijlab.net: accept(2) behavior with tcp RST right after
 handshake]
In-Reply-To: <20010212122855.A92213@prism.flugsvamp.com> "from Jonathan Lemon
 at Feb 12, 2001 12:28:55 pm"
To: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:51:48 -0800 (PST)
Cc: kris@obsecurity.org, net@freebsd.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL77 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Jonathan Lemon writes:
> > > Did you guys agree on a commit-worthy fix yet?
> > 
> > I wasn't party to the issue that generated this thread in the first
> > place, but..  I think the concensus is that if accept(2) returns
> > an error then this will break some applications, so instead it
> > should return a socket which will itself return an error on the
> > first operation. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> No, as this is the current behavior.  The change will be for accept
> to return an error, on the basis that 1) most apps already do the 
> wrong thing now anyway, and 2) it brings us closer to a 'standard',
> e.g.: what other systems are doing as well.

I don't understand then.

What is the problem with the current behavior? Is this just an
optimization or a real bug fix? I'd say it's not worth changing
if it's just an optimization, because too many things will break.
Several apps have already been pointed out.

And what do you mean by ``most apps already do the wrong thing now''?

-Archie

__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs     *     Packet Design     *     http://www.packetdesign.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message