[erlang-questions] 17.3, ssl and raw options?

[Ingela Andin]

Hi!

Some time ago we added a check that the options list should be a kev-value
list, as there where
some pretty strange errors when using next protocol negotiation due to the
fact that the input was incorrectly
formated. Unrecognized options are assumed to be inet options and passed on
to inet. We do have some
special clauses for making exceptions for  inet and inet6, so we will have
to add a raw  clause too.

Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP Team - Ericsson AB


2014-10-07 16:33 GMT+02:00 Roger Lipscombe <roger@REDACTED>:

> On 7 October 2014 14:38, Roger Lipscombe <roger@REDACTED> wrote:
> > In Erlang R16B03-1, I've been passing raw options to ssl:listen as
> > follows, and it's been working fine:
> >
> >     % The constants are defined elsewhere.
> >     LOpts = [{raw, ?IPPROTO_TCP, ?TCP_MAXSEG, <<MSS:32/native>>} | ...],
> >     {ok, LSocket} = ssl:listen(0, LOpts)
> >
> > In Erlang 17.3, this fails with
> > {option_not_a_key_value_tuple,{raw,6,2,<<64,2,0,0>>}}
> >
> > How do I pass a raw option to ssl:listen in Erlang 17.3?
>
> Oh, and ssl:setopts doesn't appear to be sufficient. TCP_MAXSEG must
> be set when the socket is initially opened, before listen is called.
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20141008/3d00ed57/attachment.htm>