Hiroki, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:30:02AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: H> Given that we add a new API to H> enumerate the interfaces including bpf-only providers with fake H> ifnets, which providers/utilities should be converted to use it? IMO H> usbusN would be a reasonable target but others still need a real H> ifnet. In my understanding, the advantage of using a fake ifnet is H> just to prevent it from appearing as an interface. Is it correct?
IMO, neither ipfwlog0 nor pflog0 nor pfsync0 need 'struct ifnet'. They are pure providers for tcpdump only. (pfsync0 also consumes if_ioctl to configure itself, but this can be axed and configuring should be done via /dev/pf as all other parts of pf.) As soon as Alexander comes with API that makes it possible to create BPF "dumping points" in kernel that aren't tied to 'struct ifnet', I'd be happy to remove pfsync/pflog/ipfwlog as interfaces. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
