Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:02:43 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> To: julian@elischer.org (Julian Elischer) Cc: archie@whistle.com (Archie Cobbs), myevmenkin@att.com (Yevmenkin Maksim N CSCIO), freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NETGRAPH patches (proposal) Message-ID: <200002230502.VAA84742@bubba.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <38B34BBA.41C67EA6@elischer.org> from Julian Elischer at "Feb 22, 2000 06:53:46 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer writes: > > > 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. > > 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. So.. we can have two hooks, one that sets the host address and one that doesn't.. :-) -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200002230502.VAA84742>