Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.bbs.mystic    |    Mystic Sysops are mystical nerds...    |    11,842 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 10,002 of 11,842    |
|    LEE WESTLAKE to All    |
|    Re: Door32.sys development    |
|    14 Jun 21 12:58:57    |
      From: nospam.LEE.WESTLAKE@f6.n250.z2.fidonet.org              Hi g00r00,              Thank you for taking the time to address each of the points raised; your       comprehensive response is very much appreciated.               g0> Blocking               g0> The only standard that I know of that ever attempted to define anything        g0> was Mystic's DOOR32 and that uses blocking sockets. I assume you'd        g0> probably get blocking from most BBSes then by default, but I can't say        g0> for sure what other software does.               g0> I think it'd be a good practice to do this.               g0> The original intention was that the socket should be duplicated before        g0> being passed to the door, but I think in practice that didn't end up        g0> being guarenteed or even done at all because of variations in operating        g0> systems (and if I am not mistaken some OSes specifically said that        g0> sockets should not be duplicated).              I've decided to do the extra legwork and write comm routines which work       transparently for either blocking or non-blocking sockets - as winsock       doesn't detect socket mode reliably, this solution removes the headache of       socket mode altogether.               g0> It *might* be safe to call only when it drops but I can't say for sure        g0> without experimentation.               g0> If I remember correctly calling WSACleanup is a Windows specific thing        g0> and it invalidates any socket handles used by the process. For that        g0> reason I think it was not called in any case within D32 doors. Instead        g0> it let the BBS detect the connection loss and do what it does.               g0> Things may behave differently depending of if/when the socket was        g0> duplicated by the BBS before being passed, but I would        g0> operate on the assumption that the socket is not duplicated.              Further testing appears to corroborate this: from what I can tell, WSACleanup       is best left to the BBS.              Again, thank you ever so much for taking the time to address these issues.              Best Regards              |01°|09²²²²² |01³|09 Lee Westlake |01(aka TALIADON)       °|09²|01°|09²|01°|09² |01³|09 TALIADON BBS |01(taliadon.ddns.net)        °|09²|01 ³ E-Mail: taliadon-bbs@mail.com        °|09²²²|01 ³ fsxNet: 21:3/138 ù FidoNet: 2:250/6              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca