From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 4 17:00:14 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: net@FreeBSD.org 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 E673D16A420; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 17:00:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from raglon@packetfront.com) Received: from mail.packetfront.com (mail.packetfront.com [212.247.6.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65DA843D45; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 17:00:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from raglon@packetfront.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.packetfront.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E9F1A3F71; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:00:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.packetfront.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30061-03; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:00:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.159] (pf-raglon.int.packetfront.com [192.168.1.159]) by mail.packetfront.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3CFA3F68; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:00:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4342B4BE.1040304@packetfront.com> Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:58:38 +0200 From: Ragnar Lonn User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ceri Davies References: <20051003130731.GF56760@submonkey.net> <20051003134132.GE73935@cell.sick.ru> <20051003135324.GH56760@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <20051003135324.GH56760@submonkey.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at packetfront.com Cc: Gleb Smirnoff , net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ng_tee, right2left, et al X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 17:00:14 -0000 Ceri Davies wrote: >I only call it "wrong" as it didn't agree with Archie's article or my >expectations, hence the quotes - I realise that it's subjective. > >It just seems to me that packets leaving left2right would go to right, >as the name implies. I don't really mind either way, it's simply that >I found it confusing. > > It's not, really. A good idea is to draw the tee node and its hooks on a piece of paper. Here is an ASCII attempt: left --- right \ / x / \ r2l l2r The drawing shows that the left hook is associated with the left2right hook: When packets come in on the left hook they are forwarded to the left2right hook. Logically, that means they are connected, like in the drawing above, and that also means that packets can go in the other direction - i.e. from the left2right hook and to the left hook. /Ragnar