Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 21:35:05 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 265064] connect(2): unexpected EADDRINUSE when connecting from IPv6 wildcard to IPv4 address Message-ID: <bug-265064-7501-yvxEHgeOFU@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-265064-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-265064-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D265064 --- Comment #6 from Mike Karels <karels@freebsd.org> --- (In reply to firk from comment #5) > No, wildcard ipv6 bind() shouldn't fail just because ipv4 port > for the specifiec ipv4 address is busy. There is nothing specific in this bind() call. The address is ANY and the = port is zero. Also, the application has cleared the IPV6_ONLY option, specifica= lly enabling IPv4. It seems far better to allocate a port that can work for IP= v4 as well as IPv6 in this case. My in-progress change modifies only that situation. Hopefully I'll be ready to circulate the change soon. > I'm not sure how this error should be reported to userland, but it surely > shouldn't be triggered until we try to connect() to ipv6-wrapped ipv4 add= ress. > May be it will be okay to return EADDRNOTAVAIL from such connect(), consi= dering > wildcard-bound socket as partially unbound socket as we really have to do > new ipv4-bind() over existing ipv6-wildcard-bind. We can't do a new bind() for IPv4; ports are immutable once bound. Note th= at the application could have skipped the bind() call, in which case connect()= can do the right thing. But this procedure should also work. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-265064-7501-yvxEHgeOFU>