From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Jun  7 23:00:27 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA13267
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 23:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA13259
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 23:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Root.COM (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA12797; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 23:00:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199606080600.XAA12797@Root.COM>
X-Authentication-Warning: implode.Root.COM: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: jmf@free-gate.com (Jean-Marc Frailong)
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ISC dhcp, AF_UNSPEC & bpf bugs 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 07 Jun 1996 21:53:16 GMT."
             <31b894c2.880770591@192.168.1.1> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 1996 23:00:28 -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>I am currently trying to port the ISC DHCP server to FreeBSD. In the
>process, I found 2 problems related to the BPF implementation, which
>they use to send packets on specific interfaces.
>
>1. When sending a packet via BPF, the ether type gets byte-swapped.

   This issue keeps coming up - I think it was the AppleTalk people the last
time. I personally could care less which way it is and don't have an opinion.
Someone just decide which way it fits the standard usage model the best and
send in a diff.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project