[erlang-questions] ssl cb_info vs custom socket library
Thu Feb 7 14:23:23 CET 2013
The cb_info option is to not lock the SSL implementation to use TCP as
transport protocol. An other reliable transport protocol implemented
with same API could be used. At the moment we do not have any other
transport protocol. The transport workaround is for the TCP protocol
specifically, so the check is to avoid the whole workaround. Your
problem however is that the assumption is that it will be an inet
socket. And inet:setops will be called directly on the socket. So to
enable what you want to do probably there should be an callback module
for inet too.
We would rather not wrap gen_tcp to allow it to be the same module!
Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
2013/2/6, Magnus Henoch <>:
> Hi all,
> I'm trying to use the ssl application together with a custom socket
> library, using the cb_info option to pass in the module name. However,
> at some places the ssl application assumes that the socket is a "real"
> socket, and calls inet:setopts on it - though
> ssl_connection:workaround_transport_delivery_problems specifically
> checks for this and avoids inet:setopts if the transport module is not
> I realise that cb_info is an undocumented option, so I'd appreciate any
> opinions before spending more time on this. Are there any other reasons
> why using a different transport callback would not work? Would a patch
> fixing such problems be welcome?
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions