Re: SO_REUSEPORT and multicasting

[Jason <bofh1234567@yahoo.com>]

--- David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> Instead of degenerating this mailing list into a BSD
> socket
> programming class, you may find this informative:
> 
> 
>
http://www.unixguide.net/network/socketfaq/4.11.shtml
> 
> and it's covered extensively in W. Richard Steven's
> book, TCP/IP
> Illustrated, Volume 2.  It is considered the bible
> on BSD socket
> programming.
> 
> Particularly telling is the final paragraph from
> that web page which
> reads:
> 
> 	Basically SO_REUSEPORT is a BSD'ism that arose when
> 	multicast was added, evne though it was not used in
> the
> 	original Steve Deering code.  I believe some
> BSD-derived
> 	systems may also include it.  SO_REUSEPORT lets you
> bind
> 	the same address *and* port, but only if all the
> binders
> 	have specified it.  But when binding to multicast
> address
> 	(its main use), SO_REUSEADDR is considered
> identical to
> 	SO_REUSEPORT (p. 731, "TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume
> 2").
> 	So for portability of multicast applications, I
> always
> 	use SO_REUSEADDR.
> 
> I STRONGLY suggest you go read that reference to
> page 731 in
> the Steven book.


I agree that I don't want to start a flamewar or get
off topic.  However, I did state earlier that I did
switch to use SO_REUSEADDR and while the program
compiled on Linux (without error) the server did not
receive any packets.  Hence my questions regarding
Linux supporting multicasting.  

Thanks,

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com