InfoMagic Internet Tools 1995 April/Internet Tools.iso/dos_win/winsock/maillist/94-03.Z/94-03/text0271.txt

Text File | 1994-03-30 | 12.0 KB | 278 lines

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Sean Sullivan" writes:

>If you use version 1 B Beta#2 this problem will be eliminated.  However, this
>is a prerelease version and seems to have some glitches.

Well, using version 1 B Beta#2 I just got a general protection fault :(
is there any other talk software out there ?

adrian
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: Adrian Parker :: [e-mail] :: West Midlands, England ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From [e-mail] Mon Mar 21 19:20:39 1994
Received: from bigblue.oit.unc.edu by SunSITE.Unc.EDU (5.65c+IDA/FvK-1.07) with SMTP
          id AA27902; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 17:01:23 -0500
Received: by bigblue.oit.unc.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA28389; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 16:39:53 -0500
Received: from GATEWAY by bigblue with netnews
    for [e-mail] ([e-mail])
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 19:20:39 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Rich Barrette)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens
Sender: ses
Subject: Chameleon Demo & ftp.netmanage.com



Hello!

Has anyone managed to pull this thing down?  I haven't
seen thoroughput that slow since my 1200 baud C64 days
in grade school.  Ugh!

If anyone has it at an alternate site or could somehow
manage to email it to me I would appreciate it.  As I
understand it the demo serial number date expires shortly.

Thanks!

-Rich
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Richard M. Barrette -=-=-=-=-=- [e-mail]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Apparently, Americans are pretty nasty. More than 68% of the
 population is within one standard deviation of being mean.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From [e-mail] Mon Mar 21 20:44:03 1994
Received: from bigblue.oit.unc.edu by SunSITE.Unc.EDU (5.65c+IDA/FvK-1.07) with SMTP
          id AA06125; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 18:02:28 -0500
Received: by bigblue.oit.unc.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA08113; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 17:17:55 -0500
Received: from GATEWAY by bigblue with netnews
    for [e-mail] ([e-mail])
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 20:44:03 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Pete Bentley)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Organization: T.E.C.C. Ltd, London, England.
Sender: ses
Subject: WSAAsynchSelect(), FD_WRITE etc

[Er, if there is a newsgroup / mailing list where winsock programmers
hang out, I'd be grateful if someone would point me at it.  It's hard
to keep up with alt.winsock as 99% of it is noise (from a programmer's
point of view :-)]

According to my version of the Winsock 1.1 spec, when WSAAsyncSelect()
is called with FD_WRITE set in the event mask, no message is returned
to the application until some send() call actually blocks. Fair enough.
Some DLLs seem to try and be 'helpful' including the free Microsoft
stack and Trumpet (up to alpha #18, at least) and will deliver an
FD_WRITE indication if a WSAAsyncSelect() is issued on a socket which
includes FD_WRITE *if* the previous mask didn't include FD_WRITE *and*
the socket is currently writable.  In my opinion, this behavious is
more useful, as it will naturally kick-start applications which are
totally message driven.

As it happens I have written a set of class libraries which are
totally event driven and do their 'real' work by making callbacks to
the application code (it overrides member functions).  One application
which makes use of these classes is basically structured as a state
machine, with certain state transitions being made when all the data
that the application queued on a socket has made it through send()
(this app is making use of buffering within the socket class so it
issue lots of small send()'s without causing network load (or having
to rely on Nagel algorithms within the Winsock DLL to do that)).

Now, my previous strategy was to add FD_WRITE to an internal event
mask and issue a new WSAAsyncSelect() whenever data was added to an
empty buffered socket, then when the app returns to Windows, many (most?)
Winsock DLLs will send a message indicating FD_WRITE and the data gets
sent to send().

And then someone tries to use the application with FTP's PC/TCP stack
& DLL and it falls flat because this DLL really won't deliver an
FD_WRITE indication until a send() returns EWOULDBLOCK.  Reading the
spec closely, I can't fault them for that, but its a real pain.
Suddenly code which was happily event driven needs to be kick started
by a flush() function if there is a chance the socket isn't blocked.
And to make the class libraries work I either have to call the
callbacks directly or post fake FD_WRITE messages.  Neither of these
approaches are desirable, one risks recursion (the callback is
extremely likely to queue more data which may need to be flush()ed)
and the other tends to overlflow the task's message queue when run
with a 'nice' DLL which is also queuing FD_WRITE indications.

Anyway, looking at it (hopefully) objectively, the approach where the
DLL sends extra FD_WRITE messages is cleaner from an event-driven
point of view, and is no extra stress on applications written for the
behavious in the 1.1 spec, as they have to cope with spurious FD_WRITE
messages anyway.  So my questions are:-

1) Any chance of this being changed in a future winsock spec. ie
mandate that if an application does a WSAAsyncSelect() including
FD_WRITE and the socket is writable that one FD_WRITE indication gets
sent immediately.

2) How do other people using the async. interface cope with this if
they want to keep the socket code as seperate as possible from the
application code.

3) What does a return value of 0 from send() mean?  Neither the
winsock spec. nor any of the Unix manuals I have to hand say this
means anything special (like EOF when recv() returns 0).  I only ask
because the Microsoft DLL seems to often send an FD_WRITE message to
the application, but when the application tries a send() it returns 0.
As my socket classes use a pretty standard loop write (loop until all
data written or send() returns SOCKET_ERROR), this just means they
sometimes loop rapidly through about 60 send() calls, all returning 0
until the DLL finally accepts some data.  Curious, eh?  I certainly
can't afford to treat this the same as -1/EWOULDBLOCK because I very
much doubt I would get another FD_WRITE...Just another Microsoft bug,
I guess.

Pete.
From [e-mail] Mon Mar 21 21:44:38 1994
Received: from bigblue.oit.unc.edu by SunSITE.Unc.EDU (5.65c+IDA/FvK-1.07) with SMTP
          id AA11184; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 18:31:20 -0500
Received: by bigblue.oit.unc.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA29104; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 18:23:05 -0500
Received: from GATEWAY by bigblue with netnews
    for [e-mail] ([e-mail])
To: [e-mail]
Date: 21 Mar 1994 21:44:38 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Michel.Davidoff)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Sonoma state university
Sender: ses
Subject: Why not PowerPC

I was given the task of arguing why the PowerPC (Mac) can not
be used as a PC (486 or better)
I am not looking for what is better but
for good arguments of tasks that can not be done on a PowerPC.
Like the fact the Soft Windows will only run in S mode and not E mode.



Peace
Michel Davidoff
E-Mail [e-mail]
From [e-mail] Mon Mar 21 21:03:41 1994
Received: from bigblue.oit.unc.edu by SunSITE.Unc.EDU (5.65c+IDA/FvK-1.07) with SMTP
          id AA21168; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 19:31:19 -0500
Received: by bigblue.oit.unc.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA23204; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 19:29:57 -0500
Received: from GATEWAY by bigblue with netnews
    for [e-mail] ([e-mail])
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 21:03:41 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Chris Johnson)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Organization: UB
Sender: ses
Subject: Free/Share Ware PPP?

Hi Everyone!!!  I've been following this group for some time and I
know that trumpet winsocks going to have PPP soon, but I need it now.
I just found out that my school is going to be offering PPP on a test
basis to those that ask for it.  I asked for it, but I may or may not
be able to use it because I don't have any software to handlpe PPP.
If you know of any shareware or freeware please let me know... I can't
afford to invest in commercial since I'm just a poor college student,
so I would at least like to try before I buy.

Thanks,
Chris


--
PGP key fingerprint:   |      PGP key is at [e-mail]
1024/E3F087 1993/04/20 |   alias [e-mail] 'Christopher Johnson'
00 CB 62 92 93 7D 43 6F|   All rights Reserved. Permision to quote granted.
D9 EF 28 21 EA CE 78 F1| Express permision to duplicate or archive not granted.
From [e-mail] Mon Mar 21 23:11:30 1994
Received: from bigblue.oit.unc.edu by SunSITE.Unc.EDU (5.65c+IDA/FvK-1.07) with SMTP
          id AA00712; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 20:31:20 -0500
Received: by bigblue.oit.unc.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA21345; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 20:15:34 -0500
Received: from GATEWAY by bigblue with netnews
    for [e-mail] ([e-mail])
To: [e-mail]
Date: 21 Mar 1994 23:11:30 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Robert Cook)
Message-Id: <2ml9j2$[e-mail]>
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Sender: ses
Subject: How Does one detect server closing socket

I have a server that times out a connection if its been idle
for more then a certain time.  So I'm trying to build a client
that will handle this.  I thought if I tried to send data to a
disconnected socket that send() would return SOCKET_ERROR, but
that's not happening. Noting that the Winsock specs for send()
states, "Note that the successful  completion of a send() does
not indicate that the data was successfully delivered.",  I
tried setting TCP_NODELAY on the socket and that
didn't work.  I tried using select and that didn't work.  The only
time I know that the socket is disconnected is when I use the recv()
command.  I could probably write a function that would ping the
connection
and the recv() would return SOCKET_ERROR, but that means I would first
ping the connection everytime I wanted to send data.  That seems pretty
inefficent.

So how do other people do it?  How can the client detect that
the server has closed the connection?

Thanks in advance,

Bob Cook                            _**_
Computer Science Dept.             /____|-IIIIIIIIIIII
University of Massachusetts      >|  4  |-----------\
Amherst MA                        +-(O)--------(O)--+
From [e-mail] Mon Mar 21 15:53:00 1994
Received: from ftp.com (wd40.ftp.com) by SunSITE.Unc.EDU (5.65c+IDA/FvK-1.07) with SMTP
          id AA03350; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 20:50:55 -0500
Received: from mailserv-B.ftp.com by ftp.com  ; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 20:50:54 -0500
Received: from backman.homerun by mailserv-B.ftp.com (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
    id AA24969; Mon, 21 Mar 94 20:53:00 EST
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 94 20:53:00 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: ftp software
From: [e-mail]  (Larry Backman)
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Repository: mailserv-B.ftp.com, [message accepted at Mon Mar 21 20:52:45 1994]
Originating-Client: homerun
Content-Length: 520


 >> >FTP Software, Inc. is a commercial software vendor. The product being referred
 >> >to is PC/TCP, a TCP/IP protocol stack for MS DOS and OS/2. It is definitely
 >> >_NOT_ freeware or shareware. If you are still interested, their address is:
 >>
 >>
 >>     FTP Software, Inc.
 >>     26 Princess St.
 >>     Wakefield, MA 01880
 >>
 >>     [phone] (voice)
 >>     [phone] (FAX)
 >>
These are old addresses:
we are at 2 High St., North Andover, Ma. 01845
508-485-4000


email via [e-mail]