specifying client-side link mode properties before connect()

specifying client-side link mode properties before connect()

[Stephen Crane]

Hi,
[I think I may have asked something along these lines before, but I
can't remember what the outcome was...]

I have a server application which can specify the link mode requirements
of incoming connections using setsockopt(sock, SOL_L2CAP, L2CAP_LM, opt,
sizeof(opt)). This works fine, if a client can't meet the requirements,
no connection is made and the server's accept() sees nothing.

However I'd now like to be able to specify these requirements to the
connect() call on the client-side. That is, I'd like to call setsockopt
specifying the client's requirements (master, auth, encrypt) before
calling connect(). While I can /do/ this, the LM parameters seem to have
no effect. For example, I can set the L2CAP_LM_MASTER flag on both
sides, yet a connection is still established.

I suppose my question really is: are there any plans to implement this? 
Or is the usual answer (to send a patch) the correct one :-)?

Thanks,
Steve
-- 
Stephen Crane, Rococo Software Ltd. http://www.rococosoft.com
steve.crane@rococosoft.com +353-1-6601315 (ext 209)

[Bluez-devel] Re: specifying client-side link mode properties before connect()

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Stephen,

> I have a server application which can specify the link mode requirements
> of incoming connections using setsockopt(sock, SOL_L2CAP, L2CAP_LM, opt,
> sizeof(opt)). This works fine, if a client can't meet the requirements,
> no connection is made and the server's accept() sees nothing.
> 
> However I'd now like to be able to specify these requirements to the
> connect() call on the client-side. That is, I'd like to call setsockopt
> specifying the client's requirements (master, auth, encrypt) before
> calling connect(). While I can /do/ this, the LM parameters seem to have
> no effect. For example, I can set the L2CAP_LM_MASTER flag on both
> sides, yet a connection is still established.

you can set the link mode, but the connection establishment procedure
dont't care about it.

> I suppose my question really is: are there any plans to implement this? 
> Or is the usual answer (to send a patch) the correct one :-)?

>>From my side I have no plan to implement it, but if you will do the work
and the patch don't break any other behaviour, I am going to apply it.

Regards

Marcel




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel