From owner-freebsd-net Wed Sep 4 0:43:32 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB8737B400 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 00:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from firedrake.hades.skumler.net (pc1-oxfd1-6-cust131.oxf.cable.ntl.com [80.3.240.131]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C633543E3B for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 00:43:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nighthawk@unrealircd.com) Received: by firedrake.hades.skumler.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B77076B; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 08:41:37 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 08:41:37 +0100 From: Edward Brocklesby To: Julian Elischer Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: netns and protosw Message-ID: <20020904074137.GA64750@firedrake.hades.skumler.net> References: <20020904065538.GA64646@firedrake.hades.skumler.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Julian Elischer: > is idp_input called directly or through the table? It's called through the table, along with spp_*(), idp_*(), etc (netns's equivalent to TCP and UDP, SOCK_STREAM and SOCK_DGRAM respectively). > the protosw format was changed in a rather non portable way during the > importing of ipv6. If your routine as called directly, then there is > actually no reason to have it in the protosw. Hm, what do you mean by 'directly'? Is there a place where protocol routines may be called other than through protosw? Also, is the meaning of the int argument to these functions explained somewhere? I see netinet's tcp_input calls it 'off0'; but I can't see how this is converted to a struct inpcb (if it is at all, that is.) -larne. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message