Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "ai_all".
Did you mean:
ti_all
2004 Jan 19
0
rsync 2.6.0 and Solaris 8
...+68,6 @@
#define AI_PASSIVE 0x00000001 /* get address to use bind() */
#define AI_CANONNAME 0x00000002 /* fill ai_canonname */
#define AI_NUMERICHOST 0x00000004 /* prevent name resolution */
-/* valid flags for addrinfo */
-#define AI_MASK (AI_PASSIVE | AI_CANONNAME | AI_NUMERICHOST)
#define AI_ALL 0x00000100 /* IPv6 and IPv4-mapped (with AI_V4MAPPED) */
#define AI_V4MAPPED_CFG 0x00000200 /* accept IPv4-mapped if kernel supports */
@@ -105,6 +105,10 @@
extern void freehostent(struct hostent *);
extern char *gai_strerror(int);
#endif /* AI_PASSIVE */
+#ifndef AI_MASK
+/* valid flags for a...
2024 Jul 15
1
Request for a Lockdown option
...supported and turned on by default on KAME/FreeBSD[34]
and KAME/BSDI4,
- supported but turned off by default on KAME/NetBSD and KAME/FreeBSD5,
- not supported on KAME/FreeBSD228, KAME/OpenBSD and KAME/BSDI3.
see 1.12 in this document for details.
* The AI_ALL and AI_V4MAPPED flags are not supported.
and
It looks that RFC2553/3493 talks too little on wildcard bind issue,
specifically on (1) port space issue, (2) failure mode, (3) relationship
between AF_INET/INET6 wildcard bind like ordering constraint, and (4) behavior
when conflicting socket...
2024 Jul 15
1
Request for a Lockdown option
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 10:25:46AM +0100, Brian Candler wrote:
> On 14/07/2024 03:49, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> > I have read
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cmetz-v6ops-v4mapped-api-harmful-01
> >
> > but as an application developer i find it ugly not to be able to
> > "simply do it", and get back a mapped address.
2007 Jan 06
3
Re: [nut-commits] svn commit r708 - in trunk: . clients server
With the Ipv6 patch (r708), I get:
upsclient.c: In function `upscli_connect':
upsclient.c:469: `AI_ADDRCONFIG' undeclared (first use in this function)
upsclient.c:469: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
upsclient.c:469: for each function it appears in.)
Even if it doesn't break IPv4 support, it may break portability, as
IPv6 seems to require specific functions that are