Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 11:27:25 -0400 From: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com> To: Bruce Simpson <bms@fastmail.net> Cc: Ryan Stone <rstone@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r304436 - in head: . sys/netinet Message-ID: <CAFMmRNwDPy4Hd35DrfREZQzjvd89qw=zhEriddG8U8NV7tD=EA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <fcb33eac-ec99-03c7-57b5-f24f86c4f41a@fastmail.net> References: <201608182259.u7IMx5oW002018@repo.freebsd.org> <4fbc2e1d-3a62-5963-83d5-f9c931503e51@fastmail.net> <3806700d-ed27-7915-4818-c2d64f7b806d@fastmail.net> <CAFMmRNyi=PwE9pc9_8wCU63=HttUzFR4Zh2v=uHKcQ-zaLxdJQ@mail.gmail.com> <fcb33eac-ec99-03c7-57b5-f24f86c4f41a@fastmail.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Bruce Simpson <bms@fastmail.net> wrote: > tun(4) on the other hand is a plain, PPP-like, IP tunnel. > Can you send a broadcast packet through an L3 tunnel? I thought that a L2 tunnel was required. But this mbuf flag is not guaranteed to be set in all situations; e.g. > where the link layer does not have the concept of broadcast being distinct > from other kinds of network traffic. PPP and ATM are the most obvious > examples. > We don't support ATM, but PPP is a good example. I hadn't thought of that. Hm, ip_input() already has to check for a broadcast IP. What it set M_BCAST on the mbuf at that time?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFMmRNwDPy4Hd35DrfREZQzjvd89qw=zhEriddG8U8NV7tD=EA>