Re: [RFC] connectat()/bindat() or an alternative design

Two small addendums to my previous email:

First, I linked these two unresponded-to emails for prior art in the
opening email of the thread:

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/4FCF171B.8000207@parallels.com/ (local)
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAEnbY+co6YLXANfeMnfBOBs8Ba_Sbdqz0Ahm8RzAhRF7MrxL4Q@mail.gmail.com/ (local)

Since then, I found one more:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20120815161141.7598.16682.stgit@localhost.localdomain/#t (local)

which is an actual patch by the same person that wrote the first linked
email, with replies. Hopefully that is useful.


Second, it occurred to me that regarding

(Maybe `bind_unix_anon` should furthermore `listen` right away on
`lfd` too?)

a useful thing to first decide is whether `bind_unix_anon` is
helpful and/or should be allowed for `SOCK_DGRAM`.

John