From owner-freebsd-net Wed Aug 29 12: 7:58 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [216.33.66.196]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328D937B409 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:07:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 010A181D07; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:07:55 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:07:55 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Mike Silbersack Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BPF question Message-ID: <20010829140755.T81307@elvis.mu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from silby@silby.com on Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 02:56:06PM -0400 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 * Mike Silbersack [010829 13:56] wrote: > Silly question I could probably figure out myself, but thought it would be > quicker to ask here... > > When listening on an ethernet interface, are the packets you see from > yourself intercepted inside the network stack, or are you actually > sniffing them off the wire? I'm helping someone track down corrupted > packets he's seeing in tcpdump, and I'd like to know if I can locate where > the corruption may be occuring more exactly. If you look, I'm pretty sure the tap occurs in ether_input/output, which means that obviously it is up to the driver to get the packet to that point unmolested. -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message