[erlang-questions] unix domain sockets with abstract namespace: can't use all 108 bytes

Richard A. O'Keefe ok@REDACTED
Mon May 1 23:44:35 CEST 2017

> On 29/04/2017, at 12:28 AM, Raimo Niskanen <raimo+erlang-questions@REDACTED> wrote:
> It is difficult to reliably detect the other direction i.e in the driver
> when you get an address from e.g getsockname(); is it an empty string or an
> abstract address?

Surely an empty string would never have been legal,
so if the first byte is NUL and the host supports abstract
addresses, it must be an abstract address?

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list