lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Tasks: task #6998, Implement IPPROTO_UDPLITE for...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
task #6998: Implement IPPROTO_UDPLITE for Socket layer
Submitter: | Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> | ||
Submitted: | Mon 11 Jun 2007 08:54:46 AM UTC | ||
Category: | None | Should Start On: | Sun 10 Jun 2007 10:00:00 PM UTC |
Should be Finished on: | Sun 10 Jun 2007 10:00:00 PM UTC | Priority: | 1 - Later |
Status: | Done | Privacy: | Public |
Assigned to: | goldsimon | Percent Complete: | 100% |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
Effort: | 0.00 |
Jump to the original submission
Thu 23 Aug 2007 06:21:33 AM UTC, comment #15: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 22 Aug 2007 08:24:07 PM UTC, comment #14: Is it's right, I think it's in all layers, perhaps a bug report should be better, but since last changes were about this task, it was to get the last background. But if you prefer, reclose it, and we will open a bug item, no problem for me. |
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Wed 22 Aug 2007 08:09:42 PM UTC, comment #13: Frédéric, you reopened this if I'm right? But your problem seems to be more generic, not exactly linked to the socket API, isn't it? |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 25 Jul 2007 07:49:27 PM UTC, comment #12: I attach a capture file (note that I only set IPPROTO_UDPLITE in "proto", and I don't have set any setsockopt, since, I suppose, default values should be good). Packet #259 is interesting for its error.
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Wed 25 Jul 2007 06:51:34 PM UTC, comment #11: I would like to do some tests of this features. The first problem I see is that wireshark detect all UDP-Lite packets with a "wrong" checksum. Of course, Wireshark isn't perfect (and sometimes seems detect error checksums on TCP packets). But, since I don't have any other reference, I have a "doubt" about this first point. Does anyone do some tests on UDP-Lite?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 17 Jun 2007 07:20:00 PM UTC, comment #10:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sun 17 Jun 2007 06:18:54 PM UTC, comment #9: It seems that SO_NO_CHECK is not supported by getsockopt. Normal?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 17 Jun 2007 03:53:56 PM UTC, comment #8: I think that ...
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 17 Jun 2007 11:46:50 AM UTC, comment #7: Implemented SO_NO_CHECK also.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 12 Jun 2007 07:34:53 AM UTC, comment #6:
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Tue 12 Jun 2007 07:03:44 AM UTC, comment #5: Thanks for pointing that out. There you see what copy & paste can do for you...
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Mon 11 Jun 2007 08:02:29 PM UTC, comment #4: Perhaps I miss something, but where do you use chksum_len_rx? Don't you have forgot to check ip.c ?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Mon 11 Jun 2007 07:55:32 PM UTC, comment #3: setsockopt(SO_NO_CHECK) could call directly :
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Mon 11 Jun 2007 07:31:22 PM UTC, comment #2: I checked in the change to lwip_socket() and get/setsockopt(). Hope it works as I didn't yet have the time to test it properly.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Mon 11 Jun 2007 09:04:09 AM UTC, comment #1:
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Mon 11 Jun 2007 08:54:46 AM UTC, original submission:
It seems that some sockets API support UDP-Lite.
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 9 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007-08-23 | goldsimon | Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |
2007-07-25 | fbernon | Attached File | - | Added udplite.acp, #13469 | |
Open/Closed | Closed | Open | |||
2007-06-17 | goldsimon | Percent Complete | 80% | 100% | |
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
2007-06-17 | goldsimon | Status | Ready For Test | Done | |
2007-06-11 | goldsimon | Status | None | Ready For Test | |
Percent Complete | 0% | 80% | |||
Assigned to | fbernon | goldsimon |
Powered by Savane 3.13-758e.
Corresponding source code
OK, opened task #7236 ("Check UDP LITE standard conformance") for that.