From owner-freebsd-questions  Fri Jul 30 14: 9:41 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from dirty.research.bell-labs.com (dirty.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.6])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 58100158CC
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 1999 14:09:32 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from lili@dnrc.bell-labs.com)
Received: from bronx.dnrc.bell-labs.com ([135.180.160.8]) by dirty; Fri Jul 30 17:06:36 EDT 1999
Received: from dnrc.bell-labs.com (delaware [135.180.240.27])
	by bronx.dnrc.bell-labs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA24709
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 1999 17:06:48 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <37A21453.8A84130C@dnrc.bell-labs.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 17:08:35 -0400
From: Li Li <lili@dnrc.bell-labs.com>
Organization: Lucent / Bell Labs, USA
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: a raw IP layer bug or standard behaviour?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

I am using raw IP socket with protocol value IPPROTO_RAW. When I receive
the IP packet in the application. The ip_len field of the IP header is
the lengthen of the data portion, not the total packet length. Is this a
bug in the raw IP layer or a standard behavour? Should the rip_input
function (in netinet/raw_ip.c) suppose to make sure the ip_len is the
total length of the packet or should it just pass whatever it gets from
the in_input function up to the socket layer?

Thanks,

L. Li


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