Re: TCP vs urgent data [was Re: poll(): IN/OUT vs {RD,WR}NORM]
Mouse <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> But reading RFC 959, there is no mention of using urgent data under > any circumstances. No _explicit_ mention. It's there by reference. > What that RFC says about aborting is: > [...] > 2. User system sends the Telnet "Synch" signal. This involves setting URG. Read the telnet spec's description of the SYNCH operation (the top of page 9 of RFC854 is a good starting point). See also SO_OOBINLINE, SIOCATMARK, and SS_RCVATMARK. I am sorely tempted to try to rip out the OOB botch and design a socket interface to the urgent pointer that isn't so badly broken, but I doubt I'd actually find any use for the latter. I might rip out the OOB stuff just to find and fix anything trying to use it, though. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [email protected] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B