RE: [Lksctp-developers] RE: About 3 confusion of spec or code.

[Gao, K. <kev...@in...>]

> >=20
> > In spec we know that we can bind more than one address in the=20
> > same chunk. So I think use sockaddr_storage is to bind more than
> > one address once. Otherwise, neither sockaddr_in6 nor sockaddr_in
> > needs 128 bytes for storage. So based on the syntax of bindx.
> > I think use sockaddr_storage as parameter is more reasonable
>=20
> Even with sockaddr *, we can bind more than one address.
>=20
> looks like you are confusing between the real sctp_bindx() API in the
> library: tools/src/lib/bindx.c:sctp_bindx() and the
> kernel routine in net/sctp/socket.c. The kernel routine is=20
> not used as=20
> reflected by the comments and it can be removed, but it was=20
> left so that it
> may be used in future if we want to implement bindx as a=20
> system call. I don't
> think this will happen as it requires changes to the core=20
> networking data=20
> structures and routines. For ex: bindx() has to be added to=20
> struct proto. As
> SCTP is the only current user of bindx(), it is tough to=20
> convince the nw
> maintainers to make this change. So we decided on a library=20
> interface using
> setsockopt().=20
>=20
> I hope this will help in clarifying your other issues too.
>=20
> Thanks
> Sridhar
>=20
>=20
Yes, I know your mean, it's clear.
But I still find in sctp/net/sctp/socket.c
There is another sctp_bindx function to do the same functionality
as bindx function in sctp_setsockopt().
But is there any using for this function "sctp_bindx" in socket.c.
If none, why not remove these redundant code?

Thanks.

-Kevin