From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 8 06:58:51 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A62B816A4CE; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 06:58:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cell.sick.ru (cell.sick.ru [217.72.144.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF35343D49; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 06:58:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@cell.sick.ru) Received: from cell.sick.ru (glebius@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.sick.ru (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i586wWvw026932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:58:32 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@cell.sick.ru) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.sick.ru (8.12.9/8.12.6/Submit) id i586wVCs026931; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:58:31 +0400 (MSD) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:58:31 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Ruslan Ermilov Message-ID: <20040608065831.GC26822@cell.sick.ru> References: <20040607071701.GC17986@cell.sick.ru> <20040607074037.GB18232@cell.sick.ru> <20040608065235.GA56799@ip.net.ua> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040608065235.GA56799@ip.net.ua> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: net@FreeBSD.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: FreeBSD current users Subject: Re: HEADSUP! netgraph Metadata changing. X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 06:58:51 -0000 On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 09:52:35AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: R> > J> > J> In addition the ng_ksocket node adds info into metadata and I suspect R> > J> > J> there are people using that. R> > J> > R> > J> > Since ng_ksocket tags packets for itself only, we can safely change it. R> > J> R> > J> Since I did not add that code I am not very familiar with it or who uses R> > J> it. (or why) R> > J> R> > J> if this is true than yes we can do this.. R> > R> > It is used only on UDP connection, to send replies back to where the original R> > packets came from. R> > R> I wouldn't hardcode it this way. Rather, it just mimics the R> sendto()/recvfrom() semantics, to represent the "to"/"from" R> arguments, respectively. Pardon, haven't understand what do you suggest. You mean, that it'll be better if node originating packets will insert this tag? -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE