<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div>Do you mean in Erlang? There is no accept in gen_sctp and prim_inet accept does not accept an SCTP socket.<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div>In C I see accept and peeloff both exist. But what I've done for Erlang after you pointed out peeloff is the same as you, if #sctp_assoc_change{} is the message received, peeloff a new 1-1 socket for it.<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div id="sig19496053"><div class="signature">--<br></div>
<div class="signature">Tristan Sloughter<br></div>
<div class="signature">t@crashfast.com<br></div>
<div class="signature"> </div>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>On Mon, Jan 25, 2016, at 10:14 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div> </div>
<div>It's been a while, but I think I just used : open, listen, wait for the connection SCTP message then from there peeloff the association into a new socket which was then handed off to a new process. I don't think I used accept.<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Regards,<br></div>
<div>Ferenc<br></div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
<div><div>On 25 January 2016 at 16:58, Tristan Sloughter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:t@crashfast.com">t@crashfast.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex;"><div><u></u><br></div>
<div><div>doh, I think you are right! I wonder if that is basically what sctp accept does, instead of requiring the extra step?<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div><div>--<br></div>
<div>Tristan Sloughter<br></div>
<div><a href="mailto:t@crashfast.com">t@crashfast.com</a><br></div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>On Mon, Jan 25, 2016, at 09:55 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div>Hi,<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div>If I understand the question correctly, you could use peeloff in SCTP for spawning processes for different connections.<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Regards,<br></div>
<div>Ferenc<br></div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
<div><div>On 25 January 2016 at 16:47, Tristan Sloughter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:t@crashfast.com">t@crashfast.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex;"><div>I'm basically reviving this old thread:<br></div>
<div><a href="http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2009-September/046558.html">http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2009-September/046558.html</a><br></div>
<div> </div>
<div>As far as I can tell an 'acccept' is necessary. It exists at the lower<br></div>
<div>level to provide a socket for communicating with the client that made<br></div>
<div>the association. Without this you can't spawn a process per client on<br></div>
<div>the server side, unless I'm missing something?<br></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Has this simply not mattered because sctp is not supported in most cloud<br></div>
<div>networks and such, so it isn't used? Meaning it makes sense for me to<br></div>
<div>add an accept interface? Or is it actually not needed somehow and<br></div>
<div>associations can be handled in a similar way to what I described without<br></div>
<div>a new socket?<br></div>
<div><span><span style="color:rgb(136, 136, 136)" class="colour"><br>
--<br>
Tristan Sloughter<br> <a href="mailto:t@crashfast.com">t@crashfast.com</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
erlang-questions mailing list<br> <a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a><br> <a href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions">http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions</a></span></span></div>
</blockquote></div>
</div>
</blockquote><div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
</div>
</blockquote><div> </div>
</body>
</html>