Cliff, I'm trying to provide an asio abstraction layer over the native SCTP stack, in much the same way as asio currently provides TCP support. At this point the same core API is supported by Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, HP-UX, etc., and it is being standardized by the IETF, so I think providing a wrapper for this interface is reasonable. Lacking strong opinions favoring just extending the existing classes, I'll provide an implementation based on providing some kind of extension mechanism to the existing socket-related classes. Then we can all decide whether we like it :) -Hal On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 10:28 -0800, Cliff Green wrote:
I'm curious - are you trying to provide an Asio-like abstraction over a native SCTP stack, or provide an SCTP API for OS's that don't provide an SCTP stack (using Asio as part or all of the implementation)? I think this basic goal would determine much of the design. (Providing a full SCTP implementation seems like an ambitious task, while an Asio-like abstraction over a native stack seems much less so.)
The HP doc on SCTP is excellent, btw (thanks for the link).
How about providing your proposed API (with specifics on how it differs from Asio), then we can provide suggestions on the best way to implement it in conjunction with Asio? Or show code alternatives for the functions / methods you want to extend? (Your option 2 seems like the best way to go, but it's hard to tell without specific details.)
Cliff
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost