Re: [Libbt-devel] the port [was: header files]

[Alien <ali...@us...>]

Op maandag 14 februari 2005 00:55, schreef Peter Stuge:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 11:31:27PM +0100, Alien wrote:
> > Op zaterdag 12 februari 2005 15:15, schreef Peter Stuge:
> > > > If not a single port than atleast a range that can also be
> > > > forwarded.
> > >
> > > There is no reason to use more than one port.
> >
> > and a user defined range to pick one out at random? i'm just saying
> > that the user might want to have 567-574 and have 4 appl using
> > libbt or an appl using 4 instances of libbt just want it?
>
> Fair enough. Four applications with libbt need separate ports, but
> then the port is a setting in the application rather than libbt. And
> if there is no setting, just use any free dynamic port. As for the
> application, it can either inform libbt about the setting, or do the
> work on it's own and provide libbt a socket after bind() and
> listen().
>
> IMHO, an application shouldn't ever need to and possibly not even be
> able to "start" more than one instance of libbt, this is one reason,
> there are probably more.

you have a point, but i'm just saying that if libbt can accept a port, it=20
could very well even accept a port range, where it randomly can choose from=
=2E=20
of course, the library should get everything do everything on one port.