From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 14 22:58:30 2004 Return-Path: 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 D6ECA16A4CE for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:58:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEF9143D46 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:58:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oppermann@networx.ch) Received: (qmail 21680 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2004 22:58:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO networx.ch) ([62.48.0.54]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 14 Oct 2004 22:58:19 -0000 Message-ID: <416F0497.806DB456@networx.ch> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:58:31 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <20041014174225.GB49508@cell.sick.ru> <416EBF0A.CB1C0366@networx.ch> <20041014202305.GA50360@cell.sick.ru> <416EE620.186AD27A@freebsd.org> <416F02CA.5020700@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Gleb Smirnoff cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: small tun(4) improvement X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:58:31 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > > Andre Oppermann wrote: > > > >P.S. I'm working on making protocols within protocols domains loadable at > >least for IPv4. > > > I did some work on this once.. things have got a lot more complicated > however with locking.. Actually there are not that many locking problems with the register and unregister functions themselfes. It get a little bit more trickier with the stuff using these hooks though. > >I'm using this to make DIVERT a loadable module. > > > cool.. the trick is to work out how to make it (un)attach to ipfw.. DIVERT sockets in themselfes do not depend on ipfw. You can send out packets just fine through a diver socket even when ipfw is missing. But you can't get any packets from the kernel unless ipfw puts them up to divert. Nothing that prevents other uses or users of divert in the end (ng_divert perhaps...). -- Andre