Received: by maskin (mbox dlanor)
 (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Sat Apr  3 08:32:34 1999)
X-From_: owner-stik-beta-testers@list.zetnet.co.uk Sat Apr  3 01:42:43 1999
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
	by maskin.ettnet.se (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA02749
	for <dlanor@oden.se>; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 01:42:43 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from UNKNOWN(194.247.47.34), claiming to be "spodden.zetnet.co.uk"
 via SMTP by maskin, id smtpdAAAa000eu; Sat Apr  3 01:42:40 1999
Received: from majordom by spodden.zetnet.co.uk with local (Exim 2.05 #1 (Debian))
	id 10TDaF-0006ud-00; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 00:42:43 +0100
Received: from dilbert.netset.com [206.183.227.13] (baldrick)
	by spodden.zetnet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #1 (Debian))
	id 10TDaD-0006uU-00; Sat, 3 Apr 1999 00:42:41 +0100
Received: from localhost (baldrick@localhost) by dilbert.netset.com (8.8.8/+dilbert+) with ESMTP id SAA32665 for <stik-beta-testers@list.zetnet.co.uk>; Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:42:35 -0500
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:42:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Ackerman <baldrick@netset.com>
To: stik-beta-testers@list.zetnet.co.uk
Subject: Re: Question about CNgetinfo under STiNG
In-Reply-To: <199904021827.UAA20176@maskin.ettnet.se>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9904021839200.32502-100000@dilbert.netset.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-stik-beta-testers@list.zetnet.co.uk
X-Loop: stik-beta-testers@list.zetnet.co.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: stik-beta-testers@list.zetnet.co.uk



On Fri, 2 Apr 1999, Ronald Andersson wrote:

> >On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Ronald Andersson wrote:
> >
> ----- snip ----- re: local IP used by connection must match call to server
> >> 
> >> We can't possibly know which IP address will be used until it happens.
> >> Nor should we need to know it.
> >
> >	Well this isn't entirely true.  I wouldn't call a lack of a
> >standard networking feature unproblematic.
> 
> When a single machine has multiple IP addresses, as all real networking
> machines do have, then it is no part of standard networking to know in
> advance which of those addresses a client will use to access a server.
> 
> That would require telepathy and/or precognition rather than networking. :-)
> 


	I cut most of your message, because it goes on with this basic
false premise above.  It's not true of BSD sockets, windows or the Mac.  I
would like to know what stacks it is true for other than STiNG.  If you
create a socket under BSD sockets you have the information that I propose
you put into STiNG.  It exists under STiK, and frankly to port ICQ to
STiNG as well as STiK would be a nightmare bastardization of the code.  It
makes no sense why a standard function under any reasonable TCP/IP stack
does not function under STiNG, and I have to hear how that's a lie.

	Dan


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail Majordomo@list.zetnet.co.uk
with the body of the message containing "unsubscribe Stik-Beta-Testers"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

.
