Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:29:53 +0000 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Steele <psteele@maxiscale.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Having problems with limited broadcast Message-ID: <49668C71.4090407@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <2ACA3DE8F9758A48B8BE2C7A847F91F2479FD9@polaris.maxiscale.com> References: <2ACA3DE8F9758A48B8BE2C7A847F91F2479DF2@polaris.maxiscale.com> <28b9b4180901070039x27a25bb4m6b50c8bfae63e0af@mail.gmail.com> <2ACA3DE8F9758A48B8BE2C7A847F91F2479E9A@polaris.maxiscale.com> <4964CA2E.5090708@wezel.com> <2ACA3DE8F9758A48B8BE2C7A847F91F2479FB0@polaris.maxiscale.com> <2ACA3DE8F9758A48B8BE2C7A847F91F2479FCE@polaris.maxiscale.com> <d763ac660901081411l59120580yb4919a16b451e3ee@mail.gmail.com> <2ACA3DE8F9758A48B8BE2C7A847F91F2479FD9@polaris.maxiscale.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Steele wrote: > ... > It's really a matter of time. We didn't anticipate limited broadcast > being broken in FreeBSD and we're scrambling to come up with a solution. > To be quite frank I haven't done anything with IPv6 before so it would > be more research to get up to speed on this option. It seems our best > option is scapy, which unfortunately I also haven't used before... > It's not broken -- it has always been this way in all BSD derived networking stacks. Limited broadcast addresses just don't contain any information about where the datagram should go, and this is the case in all other implementations. They are similar to multicast addresses in that regard. Linux has a knob SO_BINDTODEVICE which is partly there to workaround this problem, however it isn't the ideal semantic fit. The folk who point out that link-local addresses could be used, have an interesting suggestion which might work for you. thanks BMS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49668C71.4090407>