What is the difference between AF_INET and PF_INET constants?
Posted
by Denilson Sá
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Denilson Sá
Published on 2010-03-30T23:43:54Z
Indexed on
2010/03/30
23:53 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 519
Looking at examples about socket programming, we can see that some people use AF_INET
while others use PF_INET
. In addition, sometimes both of them are used at the same example. The question is: Is there any difference between them? Which one should we use?
If you can answer that, another question would be... Why there are these two similar (but equal) constants?
What I've discovered, so far:
The socket
manpage
In (Unix) socket programming, we have the socket()
function that receives the following parameters:
int socket(int domain, int type, int protocol);
The manpage says:
The
domain
argument specifies a communication domain; this selects the protocol family which will be used for communication. These families are defined in <sys/socket.h>.
And the manpage cites AF_INET
as well as some other AF_
constants for the domain
parameter. Also, at the NOTES
section of the same manpage, we can read:
The manifest constants used under 4.x BSD for protocol families are PF_UNIX, PF_INET, etc., while AF_UNIX etc. are used for address families. However, already the BSD man page promises: "The protocol family generally is the same as the address family", and subsequent standards use AF_* everywhere.
The C headers
The sys/socket.h
does not actually define those constants, but instead includes bits/socket.h
. This file defines around 38 AF_
constants and 38 PF_
constants like this:
#define PF_INET 2 /* IP protocol family. */
#define AF_INET PF_INET
Python
The Python socket module is very similar to the C API. However, there are many AF_
constants but only one PF_
constant (PF_PACKET). Thus, in Python we have no choice but use AF_INET
.
I think this decision to include only the AF_
constants follows one of the guiding principles: "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." (The Zen of Python)
© Stack Overflow or respective owner