Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:07:15 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> To: dvoinikov@kazna.ru Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Divert sockets no longer behave like connected (SS_ISCONNECTED is removed from so->so_state) Message-ID: <20041216130715.GA65090@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <1716213283.20041216094917@kazna.ru> References: <1716213283.20041216094917@kazna.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 09:49:17AM +0500, ??????? ????????? wrote: ?> I'm having this application (VPN daemon) which ?> uses divert sockets for sending stuff http://www.targeted.org/nest/ ?> It worked fine under 5.3-RELEASE but broke after ?> recent upgrade to FreeBSD 5.3-STABLE. ?> ?> An attempt to send() via divert socket now returns ?> EDESTADDRREQ "Destination address required". Digging ?> up the CVS revealed this: ?> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/ip_divert.c ?> Quote: ?> > Revision 1.98.2.1 / (download) - annotate - [select for diffs], Tue Nov 23 15:30:02 2004 UTC (3 weeks ago) by glebius ?> > Branch: RELENG_5 ?> > - Since divert protocol is not connection oriented, remove SS_ISCONNECTED flag ?> > from divert sockets. ?> ?> Also relevant is this message by Gleb Smirnoff: ?> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=50544+0+/usr/local/www/db/text/2004/freebsd-net/20041121.freebsd-net ?> Quote: ?> > So, the real change suggested is to remove SS_ISCONNECTED from so->so_state. All ?> > other changes are its logical consequences. ?> > What was idea of that SS_ISCONNECTED flag always set? I can't find any problems we ?> > can get by removing this code. ?> ?> Well, I'm having one - my application stopped working. I'm sorry that this change hurt you. I didn't have possibility to find all divert(4) consumers. ?> Also, quote from man divert: ?> ?> > Packets are written as either incom- ?> > ing or outgoing: if write(2) or send(2) is used to deliver the packet ?> > ... skip ... ?> > then the packet is treated as if it were outgoing Yes. sosend() catches this case before entering protocol specific send method. I should update manpage. ?> My case exactly, but this no longer holds. ?> ?> What am I supposed to do now ? Modify my application ? Actually I already ?> did that, by switching to sendto(), but just wanted to make sure this ?> divert sockets semantics change is intented and not spontaneous. It was intended. Actually the protocol is not connection-oriented and addr should be supplied with each write. This was not a-clean-up-only change. We have a kernel module - ng_ksocket, which ignores destaddr for connected sockets. This lead to some problems because in divert the address is actually required. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041216130715.GA65090>