From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Dec 7 10:22: 0 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from bubba.whistle.com (bubba.whistle.com [207.76.205.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1C5014D86 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:21:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from archie@whistle.com) Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) id KAA99479; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:20:28 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs Message-Id: <199912071820.KAA99479@bubba.whistle.com> Subject: Re: About divert socket In-Reply-To: from Witthaya Panichprechakorn at "Dec 7, 1999 09:32:08 am" To: b39wys@pluto.cpe.ku.ac.th (Witthaya Panichprechakorn) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:20:27 -0800 (PST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Witthaya Panichprechakorn writes: > I use divert socket to captuer packets. I found that when > I capture a set of fragmented packets, there are 2 incoming reassembled > packets. The sin_port of sockaddr_in of the first packet is 0, > and of another packet is the port number, which it bound to. > However, when the packet is not fragmented, there is only one incoming > packet with sin_port of sockaddr_in equals to the port number, which it > bound to, similar to the second captured packet when framentation > occured. What is the actual process when a set of fragmented packets is > arrived? Why the system should divert two incoming packets? What version of FreeBSD? -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message