Boost logo

Boost :

From: simon meiklejohn (simon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-22 01:49:27

From: "Christopher Kohlhoff" <chris_at_[hidden]>
> I do want to keep the callback handlers last for consistency,
> but I'll add an overload of these functions that leaves out the
> flags parameter.

Sounds good.

> Are the QoS settings configured using ioctl? My brief reading of
> MSDN would indicate so on Windows. If this is the case, then a
> new implementation of the IO_Control_Command concept could be
> added for this, which can then be passed to
> basic*socket::io_control. If you'd like to suggest what
> interface it needs (or, even better, create an implementation!)
> I'll look at adding it. BTW, is this an OS-specific thing?

Not up on this myself, though i might be able to look through
our code for some answers. Our implementation is purely win32
and is based around a separate socket class. Apparently uses
some microsoft specific API, so perhaps not just ioctl. There seems
to be a concept of negotiating/guaranteeing some data flow rate
through the socket.

I'm away from work for a couple of weeks from now, so i wont be
able to look further into it till i get back. Any experts out there please
feel free to jump in.



Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at