rsync - Apr 2026 - [Bug 2436] Please support binding to specific interfaces

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2436

--- Comment #5 from Brian J. Murrell <brian at interlinx.bc.ca>
---
> to be honest, there aren't many unix daemons coming to my mind which
have such feature to bind to specific interface/nic name, it's totally
common to specify ip address to bind/listen to.
That may be true, but ultimately it's a straw man argument to the point of
OP's
request.

Commonality doesn't have to be true for a feature request to be valid. 
Indeed.
 Every common feature is going to lack commonality the first time it's
implemented.
> can you provide an example where we can bind tcp based service to specific
nic/interface by interface name ?
Again, that's a straw man argument.  Just because no other examples exist
doesn't make this request invalid.  It's reason for request for some
unique
use-case that doesn't commonly apply to other tcp based services.
> most general purpose daemons (and rsyncd is one) stick to ip-based binding,
and the reason for that is portability (which is important for rsync).
That might be true and a fair point.  And really the only real arguable point
IMO.  Commonality (or lack thereof) isn't really a valid argument.

Now as for portability, it might be entirely possible to allow binding-by-name
as a Linux-only feature in the name of not restricting features to the lowest
common denominator.

All of that said, I am not arguing for or against this particular request, but
just trying to keep it fair.  In fact I am not even sure why I got CC'd on
this
ticket.  The e-mails for the comments say:

  You are the QA Contact for the bug.

But I am not.  And I am not on the CC list.  I suspect something has gone awry
with this BZ instance and it is mis-directing ticket comments to people not
involved with the ticket in any way.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.