Fwd: custom DatagramSocket and DatagramPacket

[Roger Abelenda]

Hello, I'm continuing a work that was started in 2006. We first
improve the already implemented, and now we are gone to view the
basics rfcs and implement the rest of the basic stack. I'll see
tonight if i can, if we already have implemented thath rfc, but i
don't think so.

2007/11/22, cormacmul <cormac.mullally at gmail.com>:
>
> Hello Roger,
>
> I just submitted a mail there about RFC 3542 and RFC 2292 Advanced Sockets
> Application Program Interface (API) for IPv6. Do you implement anything to
> do with routing headers?
>
> I am working in academia as well and would be very insterested in talking
> about your solution. Are you visible in the subscribers list, maybe I could
> contact you by email?
>
> Thanks,
> Cormac
>
>
> Roger Abelenda wrote:
> >
> > I'm in an academic project implementing an ipv6 stack entirely with
> > java in the jvm, and make the jvm by default call my ipv6 stack.
> > Thanks for advice, i'll try.
> >
> > 2007/10/30, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at sun.com>:
> >> Roger Abelenda wrote:
> >> > Hi I'm implementing an DatagramSocket and a
> >> > datagramPacket and I want to subsitute the ones of the jvm with this
> >> > ones. If you know: where may I put my code and what shall I do to make
> >> > it compile when I compile the jvm?, and , what changes Ii need to do to
> >> > plug it into the original code to make the jvm call my classes when
> >> > somebody calls the original ones?. I thought to change the
> >> > classloader.c  and the resolve.c. Any other options? thanks.
> >> >
> >> As DatagramSocket and DatagramPacket are created by public constructors
> >> then you'll need to replace the existing classes. As a first step, for
> >> testing purposes, it might be easier to prepend your classes to the boot
> >> class path rather than replacing the classes in the build. Another
> >> approach is to create a DatagramSocketImpl and use the
> >> setDatagramSocketImplFactory method to set a factory that instantiates
> >> your impl rather than the default. Can you provide a few more details on
> >> what you are trying to do? If you are trying to fix a bug or add a
> >> feature then maybe it would be easier to contribute changes to the
> >> existing code rather than replacing them.
> >>
> >> -Alan.
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Fwd%3A-custom-DatagramSocket-and-DatagramPacket-tf4718553.html#a13896659
> Sent from the OpenJDK Networking Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>