[DGD] API requirements for networking extensions

[Raymond Jennings]

Actually I think I made a bit of a booboo here.

I might have gotten your reference to the connect() system call in the OS
confused with the connect() kfun provided by DGD to the lpc layer.

*wears dunce cap*

I still stand by what I said though about query_ip_port() being a clean
idea that I personally think has merit even in the baseline code.

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Raymond Jennings <shentino at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Just to be clear, I was talking about getting the remote port from *any*
> connection, both ones created via connect() and ones received locally,
> either by the driver from a port opened by configuration, or by a port
> object that was opened.
>
> Basically, given the need for code unification, the solution I was hoping
> for would be one that would be able to treat all connections the same way
> no matter how they were established (whether outbound via connect(), or
> inbound via the driver object or a port object).
>
> I think a query_ip_port(object conn) kfun would be a neat and tidy way to
> get this information.
>
> To a lesser extent I also think that this information would be useful even
> in vanilla dgd for the same reasons even if the network extensions were NOT
> enabled.
>
> Felix, bart, what do you think?
>
>