From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Oct 28 16:20:39 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA19849
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:20:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mustang.via.net (mustang.via.net [140.174.204.4])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA19838
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:20:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from per@localhost) by mustang.via.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) id QAA21190 for hackers@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:18:26 -0800
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:18:26 -0800
From: Per Hojmark <per@via.net>
Message-Id: <199610290018.QAA21190@mustang.via.net>
To: hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: sockets programming question
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


I want to build a database server process that:
   -   listens on a port
   -   connects to incoming users
   -   forks to create new state & connection info for database.
   -   does some database lookups
   -   returns info to user 
   -   closes connection.
 
So, suppose I was listening on port 1234, when I get a connection
from a remote machine, do I need to switch to a new port number?
 
I notice that many programs use 'well known' port numbers, but after
forking, seem to switch to a port > 1024. It appears that they use
the 'well-known' port number just for the initial connection.
 
-per