Hello everyone, I have a question regarding the behavior of network listeners in my application. Here's the scenario I'm seeing: When I open a .v6 listener, it accepts both IPv4 and IPv6 traffic. However, when I run the netstat -tln command, the socket is shown as udp6. When I open a NWListener with the IP version set to .any, I receive both IPv4 and IPv6 traffic on the listener. In this case, running netstat -tln shows a udp46 socket. My understanding is that if I create a socket with .v6, it should only accept IPv6 connections, not both IPv4 and IPv6. However, the .v6 listener appears to be accepting both types of traffic, which is causing some confusion. Additionally, I am seeking to understand the difference between a udp6 socket and a udp46 socket, and also the difference between sockets created using .v6 and .any. What exactly does udp46 represent, and how is it different from udp6 in terms of accepting traffic? Is this expected behavior, or is there something I am missing in how the listeners are set up? Looking forward to hearing your insights!

Hello everyone, We have a use case where we need to disable the sending and receiving of fragmented packets on the network while using NWConnection. However, even after setting the disableFragmentation flag to true, the connection still sends fragmented packets.We’ve tried setting the flag as follows, but the packets are still being fragmented: var connection : NWConnection var udp_options : NWProtocolUDP.Optionsudp_options = NWProtocolUDP.Options() var connection_parameters = NWParameters(dtls: nil, udp: udp_options) let ip_options = connection_parameters.defaultProtocolStack.internetProtocol! as! NWProtocolIP.Options ip_options.disableFragmentation = true connection = NWConnection (host: "XX.XX.XX.***", port: NWEndpoint.Port(25000), using: connection_parameters) The issue we are encountering is that even though we’ve set disableFragmentation to true on the sender, the receiver still receives fragmented UDP packets. This can be observed using Wireshark, where we are sending a 10k byte data from the sender and receiving the fragmented datagram packets on the receiver end while both the devices are on the same WiFi network. Additionally, Wireshark shows that the packet has the "DF" bit set to '0', indicating that fragmentation is allowed. What is exactly expected from the disableFragmentation flag? Are we misunderstanding how this flag works? Or is there something else we should be doing to ensure that fragmentation is completely disabled? Looking forward to your insights!

Hello Everyone, I'm currently working on a cross-platform application that uses IP-based multicast for device discovery across both Apple and non-Apple devices running the same app. All devices join a multicast group "X.X.X.X" on port Y. For Apple devices, I am using NWConnectionGroup for multicast discovery, while for non-Apple devices, I am using BSD sockets. The issue arises when I attempt to send a multicast message to the group using NWConnectionGroup. The message is sent from a separate ephemeral port rather than the multicast port Y. As a result, all Apple processes that are using NWConnectionGroup can successfully receive the multicast message. However, the processes running on the non-Apple devices (using BSD sockets) do not receive the message. My Questions: Is there a way to configure NWConnectionGroup to send multicast messages from the same multicast port Y rather than an ephemeral port? Is there any known behavior or limitation in how NWConnectionGroup handles multicast that could explain why non-Apple devices using BSD sockets cannot receive the message? How can I ensure cross-platform multicast compatibility between Apple devices using NWConnectionGroup and non-Apple devices using BSD sockets? Any guidance or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Harshal

Hi Everyone, I’m working on a communication system for my app using NWConnection with the UDP protocol. The connection is registered to a custom serial dispatch queue. However, I’m trying to understand what the behavior will be in a scenario where the connection is canceled while there are still pending receive operations in progress. Scenario Overview: The sender is transmitting n = 100 packets to the receiver, out of which 40 packets have already been sent (i.e., delivered to the Receiver). The receiver has posted m = 20 pending receive operations, where each receive operation is responsible for handling one packet. The receiver has already successfully processed x = 10 packets. At the time of cancellation, the receiver’s buffer still holds m = 20 packets that are pending for processing, and k = 10 pending receive callbacks are in the dispatch queue, waiting to be executed. At same time when the 10th packet was processed another thread triggers .cancel() on this accepted NWConnection (on the receiver side), I need to understand the impact on the pending receive operations and their associated callbacks. My Questions: What happens to the k = 10 pending receive callbacks that are in the dispatch queue waiting to be triggered when the connection is canceled? Will these callbacks complete successfully and process the data? Or, because the connection is canceled, will they complete with failure? What happens to the remaining pending receive operations that were initiated but have not yet been scheduled in the dispatch queue? For the pending receive operations that were already initiated (i.e., the network stack is waiting to receive the data, but the callback hasn’t been scheduled yet), will they fail immediately when the connection is canceled? Or is there any chance that the framework might still process these receives before the cancellation fully takes effect?