Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 19:47:31 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: "'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com'" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc: jmorrison AT gt DOT ca
Subject: Re: Bug in Cygwin - networking api ??
Message-ID: <20010404194731.C5687@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: "'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com'" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>,
	jmorrison AT gt DOT ca
References: <99C92DEAB441D411883F00D0B747A9C60243C846 AT yvrxch01 DOT gt DOT ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <99C92DEAB441D411883F00D0B747A9C60243C846@yvrxch01.gt.ca>; from jmorrison@gt.ca on Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 04:19:52PM -0700

You realize that the email that you quoted comes from almost two years ago,
right?

cgf

On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 04:19:52PM -0700, John Paul Morrison wrote:
>Did you ever get any replies to this? I was trying to compile traceroute in
>the latest
>Cygwin and couldn't get it working. 
>
>I did a little bit of digging on the web, and a couple sites said that 
>either winsock itself was broken for raw sockets, or you had to dig deeper
>into the windows API (reverse engineer tracert.exe and icmp.dll?); 
>
>another site added that in Windows NT only administrators could create raw
>sockets (and gave a registry key to disable the behaviour). 
>
>
>
>-----------------
>Bug in Cygwin - networking api ??
>To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com 
>Subject: Bug in Cygwin - networking api ?? 
>From: "Ashish C. Nagre" <ashishcn AT cisco DOT com> 
>Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 10:56:46 -0700 
>Organization: Cisco Systems 
>Reply-To: ashishcn AT cisco DOT com 
>
>Hello,
>I  have come across two important problems with the cygnus socket
>implemntation.
>
>1. A raw socket is opened with the following call:
>		
>	s = socket (AF_INET, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_RAW)
>but when I used "snoop" to look at the packets being out on the wire,
>the protocol field contained in the packets was 255 (RAW)
>On changing the above socket call to 
>	s = socket (AF_INET, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_UDP)
>It put the correct value that was expected.
>
>2. When packets are sent to it, they are not picked up (or not being
>given to the application for some reason)
>The socket calls used to wait for a packet are as follows: 
>
>	fd_set fds;
>	struct sockaddr_in *fromp;
>	int fromlen = sizeof (*fromp);
>
>	FD_ZERO (&fds);
>	FD_SET (sock, &fds);
>	
>	if (select (sock + 1, &fds, NULL, NULL, &wait) > 0)
>		cc = recvfrom (s, (char*)packet, sizeof(packet)), 0,
>			(struct sockaddr *)fromp, &fromlen);
>
>Is there some problem with the implementation of the select call ?
>Does some special care have to be taken ?
>The code that is being used has been around ('around' as in 'being
>used') for a long time, and is an important application on all UNIX
>systems. (To those who are curious, it is the traceroute by Van
>Jacobson).
>For now, the strange behaviour of this code seems to me like a bug(s) in
>the implementation of the networking API in cygwin.
>
>I will be very grateful to anyone answering these questions.
>
>--
>Want to unsubscribe from this list?
>Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
>
>--
>Want to unsubscribe from this list?
>Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

-- 
cgf AT cygnus DOT com                        Red Hat, Inc.
http://sources.redhat.com/            http://www.redhat.com/

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple