site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com -josh On Jun 1, 2006, at 12:42 AM, Michael Smith wrote: On May 31, 2006, at 9:44 PM, Michelle Munson wrote: By setting the socket options SO_REUSEADDR and SO_REUSEPORT, I've been able to successfully get two instances of the same process running as the same user to bind and share the same UDP port on OS X. However, if the two instances of the process are running as different user ids, the bind attempt by the second instance of the process fails with "address already in use". Does anyone know if there is way to get two instances of the same process running as different user ids to reuse the same UDP port on Mac OS X? = Mike _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com This is not odd at all. It is very common for multiple clients to listen for multicast traffic. What's odd are the weird socket options, SO_REUSEADDR and SO_REUSEPORT that cause endless confusion and bugs. This is a very odd thing to want to have happen. What behaviour would you expect from such a shared port with regards to inbound traffic? _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/jgraessley% 40apple.com This email sent to jgraessley@apple.com smime.p7s