From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Laight Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 0/6] A step closer to RFC 6458 compliancy Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 15:36:36 +0000 Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1725DEC9@AcuExch.aculab.com> References: <1403017296-28469-1-git-send-email-geirola@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: "linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org" To: 'Geir Ola Vaagland' , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" Return-path: Received: from mx0.aculab.com ([213.249.233.131]:53228 "HELO mx0.aculab.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S933394AbaFQPht convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 11:37:49 -0400 Received: from mx0.aculab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.aculab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id 05914-08 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:37:40 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <1403017296-28469-1-git-send-email-geirola@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Of Geir Ola Vaagland > These patches are part of my master thesis project. I have been searching for discrepancies between > the socket API specificiation in RFC 6458 and the current Linux SCTP implementation. The following > patches are my humble attempts at getting somewhat closer to compliancy. I've just been reading RFC 6458 - HTF did it get past the editors and then published in its current form? Lots of the structures have implied padding. There is an embedded 'struct sockaddr_storage' in the middle of one structure. In some OS this should never actually be instantiated. Maybe the interface could have been changed in 2001, but not in 2011. David