Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:02:51 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@vicor-nb.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, net@FreeBSD.ORG, wollman@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: re-entrancy and the IP stack. Message-ID: <20011117000251.A13B93811@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3BF5A5D5.3D408744@vicor-nb.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: [..] > What is needed is obviously a 'per packet' storage location > for those things, defined in a "per protocol family" manner. > > Luigi has already tried this scheme by defining a > dummynet specific mbuf type that can be prepended to the > front of packets. What I suggest is to extend this > to defining a MT_PROTOSTORAGE. (or similar) mbuf type > that generic networking code is educated to ignore, > and that protocols can use to pass packet-specific state > information from one place to another. Uhh.. no thanks. Whatever you do, do *NOT* abuse the mbuf system for this. We went to a lot of trouble (well, Garrett specifically) to rid the stacks of this obscenity. Do *NOT* generalize it and undo it. MT_DUMMYNET must die, not be propagated elsewhere. If you want to have some general storage mechnaism, do *not* use mbufs for it. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011117000251.A13B93811>