From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 28 11:41:41 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 7FEC716A4CE for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:41:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cell.sick.ru (cell.sick.ru [217.72.144.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32B943D1D for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:41:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (glebius@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.sick.ru (8.12.11/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i9SBfZF8050627 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:41:35 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.sick.ru (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i9SBfYaL050626; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:41:34 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.sick.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@freebsd.org using -f Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:41:34 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Julian Elischer , freebsd-net@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20041028114134.GC50262@cell.sick.ru> Mail-Followup-To: Gleb Smirnoff , Julian Elischer , freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <20041027073858.GC719@empiric.icir.org> <417FF6D6.4010201@elischer.org> <20041027195233.GC770@empiric.icir.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041027195233.GC770@empiric.icir.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: Implementing IP_SENDIF (like SO_BINDTODEVICE) 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, 28 Oct 2004 11:41:41 -0000 On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 12:52:33PM -0700, Bruce M Simpson wrote: B> On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 12:28:22PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: B> > >It annoys me that we have to resort to BPF to send IP datagrams on B> > >unnumbered interfaces. Here is a half baked idea. Please look and B> > >tell me what you think. B> > B> > I've sent lots of datagrams on un-numberred interfaces using netgraph.. B> B> I should qualify my post a bit more: I began thinking along these lines B> with the intention of enabling ISC dhcp (and dhclient) to be compiled B> without using bpf support. I don't have the time or interest to port ISC B> dhcp to use netgraph, but I'd be interested to see the results if that B> happened. ng_device can be attached to "orphans" hook of ng_ether. /dev/ngdX opened by dhcpd, and packets processed. What is benefit to get rid of bpf? What is problem with it? -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE