> Well, I understand that ipip_rcv does some work cleaning sk_buff.
> But why after that sk_buff cannot be submitted to ip_rcv, not
> netif_rx?
Oops, now I see that you're talking about ip_rcv, not netif_rx...
I'm doing roughly what you're proposing in CIPE (get IP packet
encapsulated in UDP pac
> Yes, I was wrong. But is it possible in similar situation just call
> ip_rcv for the sk_buff?
What does "just call" mean? The additional setup done by the ipip
receiver is the minimum necessary to get the various parameters in the
sk_buff in a clean state (things like making sure all header poi
> > I read net/ipv4/ipip.c. It seems to me that ipip_rcv() function after
> > "unwrapping" tunelled IP packet creates "virtual Ethernet header" and submit
>
> Does it? ipip_rcv() does this:
[SKIP]
> netif_rx(skb);
>
> The packet as submitted starts with the IP header and the skb
> I read net/ipv4/ipip.c. It seems to me that ipip_rcv() function after
> "unwrapping" tunelled IP packet creates "virtual Ethernet header" and submit
Does it? ipip_rcv() does this:
iph = skb->nh.iph;
skb->mac.raw = skb->nh.raw;
i.e. the "MAC header" pointer of the packet is the
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:39:40PM +0300, Alexey Vyskubov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I read net/ipv4/ipip.c. It seems to me that ipip_rcv() function after
> "unwrapping" tunelled IP packet creates "virtual Ethernet header" and submit
> corresponding sk_buff to netif_rx().
>
> Is there a some reason to
Hello!
I read net/ipv4/ipip.c. It seems to me that ipip_rcv() function after
"unwrapping" tunelled IP packet creates "virtual Ethernet header" and submit
corresponding sk_buff to netif_rx().
Is there a some reason to do things this way instead of calling ip_rcv() for
"unwrapped" IP packet?
--
6 matches
Mail list logo
