From owner-freebsd-net Wed Apr 26 16:29:30 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from implode.root.com (root.com [209.102.106.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7538F37B8E1 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:29:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dg@implode.root.com) Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by implode.root.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA15823; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:26:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200004262326.QAA15823@implode.root.com> To: Garrett Wollman Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposal for ethernet, bridging, netgraph In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:46:18 EDT." <200004261846.OAA44415@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:26:19 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >> This could/should be done using a struct bpf_pkthdr (or something) that >> has an mbuf pointer, a protocol header pointer, and header length. It could >> also be done by just adding a few more arguments to bpf_mtap(). Abusing >> an mbuf for this is wrong no matter how you slice it. > >Far better to simply always put the link header into the front of the >mbuf and be done with it (even if it does require some extra copying). Except that BPF won't necessarily know the size of the link layer header, but maybe that doesn't matter since it should be implied with the type speced in the bpf_attach. -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org Creator of high-performance Internet servers - http://www.terasolutions.com Pave the road of life with opportunities. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message