Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 10:18:39 -0800 (PST) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: net@freebsd.org Cc: ras@e-gerbil.net Subject: Re: incorrect checksums with xl? Message-ID: <200202241818.g1OIIdq43736@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <20020222205853.GC413@overlord.e-gerbil.net> References: <3C7547E0.8050805@isi.edu> <3C7682BF.99A66C3B@iprg.nokia.com> <200202221743.g1MHhwh38542@vashon.polstra.com> <20020222205853.GC413@overlord.e-gerbil.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20020222205853.GC413@overlord.e-gerbil.net>, Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 09:43:58AM -0800, John Polstra wrote: > > Remember, bpf is used by many things besides tcpdump. Adding these > > flags would require extending the bpf API. They couldn't be added for > > the default case, because that would break compatibility with other > > applications. They'd have to be enabled specifically, by means of a > > new ioctl. > > You could always just add a flags field to struct bpf_hdr, and hope noone > is stupid enough to hardcode the size. That would break binary compatibility. Think about third-party applications, not available in source form, which people paid money for. They would suddenly stop working. John -- John Polstra John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200202241818.g1OIIdq43736>