Thanks Scott!
It's interesting that it was supported.
-----Original Message-----
From: c400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:c400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of c400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 03/07/2012 13:00
To: c400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: C400-L Digest, Vol 10, Issue 20
Send C400-L mailing list submissions to
c400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/c400-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
c400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
c400-l-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of C400-L digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Socket type SOCK_RAW (Boris)
2. Re: Socket type SOCK_RAW (Scott Klement)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
message: 1
date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 20:10:02 -0400
from: "Boris" <bbresc512@xxxxxxxxxx>
subject: [C400-L] Socket type SOCK_RAW
Hi Everybody,
Does anybody have more information or refer to the relevant sources
regarding why the following call is not supported on the 400?:
socket(PF_INET, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_TCP)
The help text doesn't say much:
When the socket type is SOCK_RAW, you can specify any protocol number
between 0-255. Two exceptions are the IPPROTO_TCP and IPPROTO_UDP protocols,
which cannot be specified on a socket type of SOCK_RAW (if you issue
socket(), you get an error with an error code of [EPROTONOSUPPORT])
Thanks
------------------------------
message: 2
date: Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:28:03 -0500
from: Scott Klement <c400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: [C400-L] Socket type SOCK_RAW
Hi Boris,
I don't remember the reason _why_ this was done, but back in the V4R4
release, IBM decided to disable specifying these protocol numbers for
raw sockets. I remember it, because it broke my traceroute utility
(that required the ability to specify some extra data in a UDP datagram)
When I complained to IBM about breaking backward compatibility by disabling
this functionality, they issued PTFs for V4R4 and V4R5. With V5R1, IBM
provided their own traceroute utility, and told everyone to use that,
instead. :-)
Again, I don't remember why they did this -- but I suspect that they figured
it made it more secure, since people can no longer spoof IP addresses and
stuff like that.
On 7/2/2012 7:10 PM, Boris wrote:
Hi Everybody,
Does anybody have more information or refer to the relevant sources
regarding why the following call is not supported on the 400?:
socket(PF_INET, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_TCP)
The help text doesn't say much:
When the socket type is SOCK_RAW, you can specify any protocol number
between 0-255. Two exceptions are the IPPROTO_TCP and IPPROTO_UDP
protocols, which cannot be specified on a socket type of SOCK_RAW (if
you issue socket(), you get an error with an error code of
[EPROTONOSUPPORT])
Thanks
------------------------------
--
This is the C programming iSeries / AS400 (C400-L) digest list To post a
message email: C400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list
options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/c400-l
or email: C400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/c400-l.
End of C400-L Digest, Vol 10, Issue 20
**************************************
midrange.com
