Socket implementation difference

[Charles_151]

Hi

Can anybody tell what are the socket implementation differences between hp 10.x and Solaris 9? Does this affect the application when I migrate from Hp to Solaris?

[Stephen Keane]

They are functionally equivalent. There are a few subtle differences though, off the top of my head* ...

1. The socket types are equivalent except that SOCK_SEQPACKET is not implemented on HP-UX.

2. The HP-UX version of accept(), when using address family of AF_CCITT, uses an x25addrstr structure for the second argument. The SunOS version of accept() uses a CONN_DB structure for the second argument in this situation.

3. HP-UX bind() does not return errors of EISDIR, EIO, ENOENT, EROFS or ELOOP.

4. If non-blocking I/O is enabled using O_NONBLOCK, O_NDELAY, or FIOSNBIO, and the connection cannot be completed immediately, HP-UX connect() will return a status of EINPROGRESS. SunOS incorrectly blocks until the connect call completes. Your SunOS code may be assuming the connect is complete.

5. HP-UX connect() does not return errors of EACCES, EIO, ENAMETOOLONG, ENOENT, ENOTDIR, EPROTOTYPE or ELOOP.

6. setsockname(2) and getsockname(2) do not accept SunOS options SO_OOBINLINE or SO_TYPE.

7. Non-blocking reads or writes using recv(2), recvfrom(2), recvmsg(2) send(2), sendto(2), or sendmsg(2) are configured differently between SunOS and HP-UX.

*See http://www.interex.org/tech/9000/Tech/sun_hpux_port/port7.html

for more details

[Charles_151]

Stephen

Thanks for the information. This document I have seen already, but my doubt is that these differences are applicable for Solaris9?

Regards
Charles C.

[Stephen Keane]

Which bit do you have doubts over? I have access to a range of servers here, including Solaris 9, so I can check any specific concern you have.

[Charles_151]

Stepahen

Can you please verify all bits.

It would be appreciate if you can provide standards (Socket) based difference also between Solaris9 and HP 10.x

[rick jones]

Under the covers, HP-UX 10 sockets and the TCP/IP stack were based on BSD code and had (mostly) BSD mannerisms. Initially, Solaris sockets were implemented as a library on top of TLI/XTI, but by Solaris 9 they are once again back in the kernel (perhaps by Solaris 8) however the stack is Streams based.

Tuning your Solaris 9 stack will be rather different from tuning your HP-UX 10 stack. I believe that in Solaris 9 there is still not an equivalent to the lanadmin command for link-level stats and it is still the "unsupported" netstat -k command.

If the source code to the netperf benchmark is any indication, for straightforward stuff, an application will behave just the same (ditto for HP-UX 11/11i for that matter)

Likely as not your HP-UX 10.X binaries will just run on HP-UX 11/11i - but I doubt they will run on Solaris 9 :) IIRC the compilers have differing levels of pickiness. There may be some differences simply because Solaris 9 is so much newer than HP-UX 10 - stuff like parameters to socket calls taking type socklen_t or the like.