[ntp:questions] Re: sendto(1.2.3.4): Invalid argument

[Edrusb]

Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 8:55 PM +0100 2005-08-13, David Woolley wrote:
> 
>>>  I guess, the best solution waiting for next ntpd release, as described
>>>  by Steve Kostecke, is to have my local ntpd server for my local network
>>>  be "inside" the network without any dynamic IP address.
>>
>>
>>  Note that I believe that the proposed solution is to either periodically
>>  scan for new interfaces or to scan when a server fails.
> 
> 
>     Personally, I think you probably need to do both.  You need to 
> periodically rescan the interfaces, in case a new interface has been 
> added but no old ones have gone away, and you need to also detect when 
> old ones have disappeared.
> 

Detecting when an old interface has "disappeared" should be possible 
looking at the errno global variable when sendto() system call returns 
an error (errno = EINVAL). And I guess, like Bind does, a periodic 
interface scanning plus an "on event" scanning (when sendto() returns an 
error) should be "large" enough to address this problem?

Regards,
Denis.