apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Colm MacCarthaigh <c...@stdlib.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Re: APR with SCTP streams.
Date Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:59:50 GMT
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 10:52:23AM -0500, Preethi Natarajan wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> 
> >I'm still not sure how much sense apr_parse_addr_port_protocol() makes
> >though, it doesn't look like something that belongs in APR. I'll test
> 
> Colm, apr_parse_addr_protocol() = apr_parse_addr_port() + abitlity to 
> parse for transport protocol. I could have added the extra functionality 
> inside apr_parse_addr_port() itself. Instead, I created a new function 
> becoz I needed a different function signature to accommodate the protocol 
> and did not want to modify all existing calls (not sure how many) to 
> apr_parse_addr_port() due to the new signature.
> 
> As I see it, _prootocol() alone should suffice since it is backward 
> compatible with the old Listen syntax. We can retain the old name to this 
> new function, but this will involve adding an extra argument to the 
> existing calls to apr_parse_addr_port().
> 
> Any suggestions?

I don't think it belongs in APR at all. There is no standard mechanism
for identifying a L3 protocol in a Listen block. I don't think it'll do
for APR to invent one arbitrarily. Better that each application handle
it in whatever means they deem appropriate.

httpd's particular listen syntax is entirely irrelevant to APR :-)

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net

Mime
View raw message