4 ms·
To expand on this - if you are going to mess with LD_PRELOAD, why not stick this whole library behind LD_PRELOAD? You get similar levels of compatibility (exce
by brenns10 5y ago
To expand on this - if you are going to mess with LD_PRELOAD, why not stick this whole library behind LD_PRELOAD?
You get similar levels of compatibility (except for the odd app that shirks libc and hand-codes their system calls...). But you also get the ability to do userspace protocol development, and you have an easier time of configuring the policy for how you handle new connections and subflows.
- grayfaced 5y agoThanks for the explanation, the linux internals of this is past my understanding. It reminded me of tsocks (for wrapping connections in a socks proxy), so I thought a similar thing would work. But it makes sense that you don't really get benefits unless you've tuned mptcp.