From owner-freebsd-net Thu May 9 12:53:10 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DD6837B409 for ; Thu, 9 May 2002 12:53:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from melange (melange.errno.com [66.127.85.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g49Jr44F099565 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 9 May 2002 12:53:05 -0700 (PDT)?g (envelope-from sam@errno.com)œ Message-ID: <09c401c1f793$22c6c670$52557f42@errno.com> From: "Sam Leffler" To: "Archie Cobbs" , "Luigi Rizzo" Cc: References: <200205091652.g49Gqs102639@arch20m.dellroad.org> Subject: Re: Transmitting packets when not IFF_UP Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 12:53:04 -0700 Organization: Errno Consulting MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 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 > > This said, do you have any reference or docs on the exact meaning > > of the various IFF_* flags, so we can give a sweep at the code > > and try to make things consistent and possibly centralised -- > > e.g. should we move the check for IFF_UP|IFF_RUNNING to IF_ENQUEUE > > (or whatever it is called in -current) so we do not need to bother > > in the drivers ? > > No-- I've always wondered about that, e.g., the difference between > IFF_UP and IFF_RUNNING... Originally IFF_RUNNING meant the underlying hardware was setup and ready to go (probe+config had completed successfully). IFF_UP meant the network interface was fully configured and ready for packets. I don't recall if IFF_UP => IFF_RUNNING. Sam To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message