Re: Sockets library requirements

From: mfdylan (dylan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-25 17:25:00

--- In boost_at_y..., "davlet_panech" <davlet_panech_at_y...> wrote:
> 
> Yes, but what about connectionless protocols, like UDP? (accept() 
and 
> listen() are meaningless for these). Do we want to support them? 
> Obviusly limiting the socket library to TCP only will simplify 
> everything. Another issue is that availability of protocols can 
> frequently be determined at runtime only (although TCP is probably 
> always supported). Yesterday I was playing around with my own 
socket 
> library that supports UDP, only to discover that UDP isn't 
installed 
> on my machine (NT4.0). That makes me wonder if compile-time 
protocol 
> binding is a good idea.
> 
I don't believe it's possible for UDP *not* to be installed if you're 
using TCP/IP networking.  Both DNS and NetBIOS require UDP.
UDP is extremely useful for specialised purposes, mainly broadcasting.
I've also used it as a wakeup signaller.
It isn't suitable for use with a stream or a connection-based design, 
but low-level support is definitely needed.

Dylan