From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Sep 17 11:53:33 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA02076 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 11:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usr02.primenet.com (tlambert@usr02.primenet.com [206.165.6.202]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02064 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 11:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA02758; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 11:52:52 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199709171852.LAA02758@usr02.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Problem about BPF To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 18:52:49 +0000 (GMT) Cc: stt@casper.cpe.ku.ac.th, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199709160052.KAA00498@word.smith.net.au> from "Mike Smith" at Sep 16, 97 10:22:38 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > If I want to send a frame to a BPF device, can I use more than one > > "write" commands to complete all fields of a packet? (i.e. first write for > > ether_header and another write for IP packet). > > No. Each write must be a complete datagram. Think about it for a > moment - how else could the kernel know when you had given it enough > and send the packet? You could "write" 0 bytes. Wait, no, that's DOS! Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.