From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neal Cardwell Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] inet: add IP_BIND_ADDRESS_NO_PORT to overcome bind(0) limitations Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 22:30:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1433605985.1895.84.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: David Miller , netdev , Michael Kerrisk , =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=C5=BBenczykowski?= To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f49.google.com ([209.85.218.49]:33712 "EHLO mail-oi0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752956AbbFGCaI (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jun 2015 22:30:08 -0400 Received: by oiha141 with SMTP id a141so11164208oih.0 for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 19:30:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1433605985.1895.84.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet ... > This patch adds a new SOL_IP socket option, asking kernel to ignore > the 0 port provided by application in bind(IP, port=0) and only > remember the given IP address. ... > This new feature is available for both IPv4 and IPv6. I like this a lot. This addresses a very serious gap in the sockets API, and should be very useful. The comment mentions that this is available for IPv6. From skimming the change I would have expected inet6_bind() would need a change analogous to the change in inet_bind()? Was there a missing "git add", or is a change to inet6_bind() somehow not needed? Thanks! neal