Usage of bind()

[dellthinker]

Hi all. I have a project that requires me to call bind() for Windows to bind with an address. I went here: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms737550.aspx to find out how its used but im a bit confused. It says i need sockaddr() in order to bind. Is that correct? Can someone show me what to do here because im lost. It would be nice if i could see some example code with the bind() function in it. Thanx in advance!

[JudyL_MD]

dellthinker wrote:

some example code with the bind() function in it.

Here you go:

hostent \*     localHost;
char \*        localIP;
SOCKADDR\_IN   localAddress;

m\_hSocket = socket (AF\_INET, SOCK\_STREAM, IPPROTO\_TCP);
if (m\_hSocket == INVALID\_SOCKET)
{
    return false;
}

// build our address
memset (&localAddress, 0, sizeof (SOCKADDR\_IN));

localHost = gethostbyname ("");
localIP   = inet\_ntoa (\*((struct in\_addr \*) \*(localHost->h\_addr\_list)));

localAddress.sin\_addr.s\_addr = inet\_addr (localIP);
localAddress.sin\_family      = AF\_INET;
localAddress.sin\_port        = htons (usPort);

// bind to it
if (bind (m\_hSocket, (SOCKADDR \*) &localAddress, sizeof (SOCKADDR\_IN)) == SOCKET\_ERROR)
{
    closesocket (m\_hSocket);
    m\_hSocket = INVALID\_SOCKET;
    return false;
}

// finally, listen on it
if (listen (m\_hSocket, SOMAXCONN) == SOCKET\_ERROR)
{
    closesocket (m\_hSocket);
    m\_hSocket = INVALID\_SOCKET;
    return false;
}

usPort is a variable that indicates the TCP port number this socket is bound to Judy

[Mark Salsbery]

In addition to Judy's excellent reply.... A sockaddr is a generic structure since sockets can be used on any protocol, not just IP protocols.  Therefore, for IP(4) protocols, a sockaddr_in (socket address internet) structure is used since it specifically defines a complete IP address. You can also bind to the address INADDR_ANY if you want to let WinSock pick the adapter to bind to:

localAddress.sin_addr.s_addr = INADDR_ANY;

Mark

Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:

[JudyL_MD]

Mark Salsbery wrote:

In addition to Judy's excellent reply....

:-O:-O