Archie Cobbs wrote:
>
> Yevmenkin, Maksim N, CSCIO writes:
> > > > Here is the description. ng_ether node has two hooks ``divert'' and
> > > > ``orphan''.
> > > > It is possible to connect to the one of the hooks and
> > > intercept row Ethernet
> > > > frames. But there is no clean way to intercept frame, do
> > > something and
> > > > return it back to kernel.
> > > >
> > > > This patch provides additional hook ``divertin'' (mmm...
> > > name is not good,
> > > > i think) for each ng_ether node.
> > > >
> > > > Implementation issues
> > > >
> > > > This will not work for ``orphan'' frames. Since kernel
> > > drops it anyway, i
> > > > decided to leave it as it is. But is is possible to
> > > intercept ``orphan''
> > > > packets, change it, and write back to ``divertin''.
> > >
> > > The "divertin" hook is a useful idea.. after 4.0-REL we can check
> > > something in based on your patches...
> > >
> >
> > ok. i just have a dumb question. what is the big deal with updating
> > ether_shost
> > in ethernet header in ngether_rcvdata. since we are passing raw ethernet
> > frame,
> > why should we update ether_shost? wouldn't it be nice to make it optional?
> > just another control message?
>
> I agree.. you should have to set the host address manually.
>
> -Archie
It's because all packets sent by this node should have the node's
address. If you don't have it then PPPoE cannot send a packet "FROM"
thia node, as it has no idea of what this node's address is.
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
--
__--_|\ Julian Elischer
/ \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
( OZ ) World tour 2000
---> X_.---._/ presently in: Perth
v
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
