From owner-freebsd-net  Fri Jun  2 18:55: 4 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from coconut.itojun.org (coconut.itojun.org [210.160.95.97])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A003A37B9D1
	for <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri,  2 Jun 2000 18:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from itojun@itojun.org)
Received: from kiwi.itojun.org (localhost.itojun.org [127.0.0.1])
	by coconut.itojun.org (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id KAA15123;
	Sat, 3 Jun 2000 10:54:51 +0900 (JST)
To: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: archie's message of Fri, 02 Jun 2000 13:25:14 MST.
      <200006022025.NAA10221@bubba.whistle.com>
X-Template-Reply-To: itojun@itojun.org
X-Template-Return-Receipt-To: itojun@itojun.org
X-PGP-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD  90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2
Subject: Re: BPF fix to if_loop.c
From: itojun@iijlab.net
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 10:54:51 +0900
Message-ID: <15121.959997291@coconut.itojun.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

>> 	that is my understanding for if_simloop().  one thing still unclear
>> 	to me is, what can ip{,6}_mloopback() do about it? (I believe nothing
>> 	they can do)
>
>I think the problem is that it's not clear what layer if_simloop()
>is for, or at.. it seems to get called from different layers.
>
>I.e., if it were link-layer, then you would expect to include the
>link header and do BPF.. if at the IP layer, you'd expect not to.

	I think there needs to be two entrypoints - one for layer3 (without
	link-layer, no bpf injection), one for layer 2 (with link-layer,
	inject to bpf, if_simloop).  former one can be made by removing
	call to if_simloop() in looutput() and copy some meat from if_simloop().

itojun


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message