Re: Socket Programming
From: Karl A. Krueger (kkrueger_at_example.edu)
Date: 05/31/04
- Next message: Alexander Schmolck: "Re: Haskell: functional languages vs Lisp"
- Previous message: Kalle Olavi Niemitalo: "Re: Evaluating a list programmatically"
- In reply to: David Steuber: "Re: Socket Programming"
- Next in thread: David Steuber: "Re: Socket Programming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 18:12:30 +0000 (UTC)
David Steuber <david@david-steuber.com> wrote:
> I don't recall how I got this idea, but I thought that when a
> connection to port 80 was accepted, a seperate port was used for the
> transaction so that the server could continue to listen on port 80.
Here's how I got the same wrong idea at first, which may or may not be
the same thing. When a connection to port 80 is accepted, a separate
-socket- is used for the transaction, so the server can continue to
listen on the -server socket-.
(You don't listen on a port; you listen on a socket which is bound to a
port. Your -host- is seen to pick up connections on a port, which we
sometimes call "listening on a port", but that's a misnomer.)
-- Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger@example.edu> Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Email address is spamtrapped. s/example/whoi/ "Outlook not so good." -- Magic 8-Ball Software Reviews
- Next message: Alexander Schmolck: "Re: Haskell: functional languages vs Lisp"
- Previous message: Kalle Olavi Niemitalo: "Re: Evaluating a list programmatically"
- In reply to: David Steuber: "Re: Socket Programming"
- Next in thread: David Steuber: "Re: Socket Programming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|