Re: [netsniff-ng] Re: [PATCH] build: Check for libnl-route

[Tobias Klauser]

On 2015-11-06 at 16:53:02 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:36:08PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> > On 2015-11-06 at 15:46:16 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> > > libnl-route is used in netsniff-ng tool for dump nlmsg flags.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Vadim Kochan 
> > 
> > Good catch! Applied, thanks.
> 
> I think it would be good to make (if it is possible) to make libnl
> dependency optionally. As I remember is is used mostly for creating mon
> interfaces, so may be it is better to do just panic if the config for
> libnl is not defined by configure script, so it will be needed to wrap
> libnl callers with #ifdef's where panic will be invoked.

Besides the nlmsg dissector it's used for rfmon support, i.e. this would
mean making making --rfraw in netsniff-ng and trafgen compile time
dependent. I would much prefer to avoid this, unless there's a strong
reason for it.

Do you see a use case for an netsniff-ng without libnl to justify this
change? Given also, that all major distributions I know of provide libnl
and it has a rather small footprint...

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to netsniff-ng+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [netsniff-ng] Re: [PATCH] build: Check for libnl-route

[Vadim Kochan]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 05:05:38PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> On 2015-11-06 at 16:53:02 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:36:08PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> > > On 2015-11-06 at 15:46:16 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> > > > libnl-route is used in netsniff-ng tool for dump nlmsg flags.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vadim Kochan 
> > > 
> > > Good catch! Applied, thanks.
> > 
> > I think it would be good to make (if it is possible) to make libnl
> > dependency optionally. As I remember is is used mostly for creating mon
> > interfaces, so may be it is better to do just panic if the config for
> > libnl is not defined by configure script, so it will be needed to wrap
> > libnl callers with #ifdef's where panic will be invoked.
> 
> Besides the nlmsg dissector it's used for rfmon support, i.e. this would
> mean making making --rfraw in netsniff-ng and trafgen compile time
> dependent. I would much prefer to avoid this, unless there's a strong
> reason for it.
> 
> Do you see a use case for an netsniff-ng without libnl to justify this
> change? Given also, that all major distributions I know of provide libnl
> and it has a rather small footprint...

I am just thinking in a way to make a less dependencies if to use
trafgen/netsniff-ng on the system where there is not needed to install libnl ...
Or may be provide some defines which may turn on/off code which depends
on such libs.

Regards,

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to netsniff-ng+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [netsniff-ng] Re: [PATCH] build: Check for libnl-route

[Tobias Klauser]

On 2015-11-06 at 17:06:55 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 05:05:38PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> > On 2015-11-06 at 16:53:02 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:36:08PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> > > > On 2015-11-06 at 15:46:16 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:
> > > > > libnl-route is used in netsniff-ng tool for dump nlmsg flags.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Vadim Kochan 
> > > > 
> > > > Good catch! Applied, thanks.
> > > 
> > > I think it would be good to make (if it is possible) to make libnl
> > > dependency optionally. As I remember is is used mostly for creating mon
> > > interfaces, so may be it is better to do just panic if the config for
> > > libnl is not defined by configure script, so it will be needed to wrap
> > > libnl callers with #ifdef's where panic will be invoked.
> > 
> > Besides the nlmsg dissector it's used for rfmon support, i.e. this would
> > mean making making --rfraw in netsniff-ng and trafgen compile time
> > dependent. I would much prefer to avoid this, unless there's a strong
> > reason for it.
> > 
> > Do you see a use case for an netsniff-ng without libnl to justify this
> > change? Given also, that all major distributions I know of provide libnl
> > and it has a rather small footprint...
> 
> I am just thinking in a way to make a less dependencies if to use
> trafgen/netsniff-ng on the system where there is not needed to install libnl 
> ...
> Or may be provide some defines which may turn on/off code which depends
> on such libs.

Ok, I see. If you see a way to make this work in a way which is not too
intrusive (#ifdef hell etc.), I'll gladly take a patch.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to netsniff-ng+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [netsniff-ng] Re: [PATCH] build: Check for libnl-route

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 11/06/2015 05:06 PM, Vadim Kochan wrote:

On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 05:05:38PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:

On 2015-11-06 at 16:53:02 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:

On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:36:08PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:

On 2015-11-06 at 15:46:16 +0100, Vadim Kochan  wrote:

libnl-route is used in netsniff-ng tool for dump nlmsg flags.

Signed-off-by: Vadim Kochan 


Good catch! Applied, thanks.


I think it would be good to make (if it is possible) to make libnl
dependency optionally. As I remember is is used mostly for creating mon
interfaces, so may be it is better to do just panic if the config for
libnl is not defined by configure script, so it will be needed to wrap
libnl callers with #ifdef's where panic will be invoked.


Besides the nlmsg dissector it's used for rfmon support, i.e. this would
mean making making --rfraw in netsniff-ng and trafgen compile time
dependent. I would much prefer to avoid this, unless there's a strong
reason for it.

Do you see a use case for an netsniff-ng without libnl to justify this
change? Given also, that all major distributions I know of provide libnl
and it has a rather small footprint...


I am just thinking in a way to make a less dependencies if to use
trafgen/netsniff-ng on the system where there is not needed to install libnl ...
Or may be provide some defines which may turn on/off code which depends
on such libs.


Tobias has a good point. I mean, if it's just/mostly for the sake of setting
of setting up rfmon device, how big would be the hassle of implementing this
feature in a *clean* way entirely w/o using libnl? (Not sure if it's worth the
effort though ... but if you really need this, I'm preferring this way over
some more ifdef stuff with partial feature availability.)

Thanks,
Daniel

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to netsniff-ng+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.