From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Aug 17 09:23:03 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA22771 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Aug 1998 09:23:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from omnix.net (omnix.net [194.183.217.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA22757 for ; Mon, 17 Aug 1998 09:23:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from didier@omnix.net) Received: from localhost (didier@localhost) by omnix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA08762; Mon, 17 Aug 1998 16:22:22 GMT (envelope-from didier@omnix.net) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:22:22 +0200 (CEST) From: Didier Derny To: David Greenman cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Yard/FreeBSD Problem (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199808171348.GAA19588@implode.root.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 17 Aug 1998, David Greenman wrote: > > For the server, "s" above appears to be the unconnected (listen) socket. > The TCP_NODELAY option is not propagated across to accept()ed sockets, so > you must do the setsockopt on those, not on the listen socket. > > -DG > Yard has just discovered that "dup" was loosing the TCP_NODELAY flag is it the normal behaviour for dup ? -- Didier Derny didier@omnix.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message