Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 10:33:13 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@freebsd.org> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bridge callbacks in if_ed.c? Message-ID: <20040906063313.GB84269@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040905222954.A26501@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20040905205249.GA81337@cell.sick.ru> <20040905142036.A23213@xorpc.icir.org> <20040905230100.GA82214@cell.sick.ru> <20040905222954.A26501@xorpc.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 10:29:54PM -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
L> > L> I'd rather not apply the patch unless you can show that
L> > L> the current code leads to incorrect behaviour.
L> >
L> > I suspect that packets dropped by bridge_in() called from if_ed will
L> > not be captured by bpf(4). This is incorrect.
L>
L> if you read the code you see that the bpf behaviour is
L> as it should be, and your suspect is unfounded.
L>
L> - if (!ifp->if_bpf && BDG_ACTIVE( (ifp) ) ) {
You are right, sorry.
But the packets dropped by bridge will not enter lower hook of
ng_ether(4), like they do in case of other interfaces.
L> (my summary and pov on the discussion in a separate email)
Actually, I'm working on better interaction of ng_ether and bridge,
and this hack in if_ed is on the way. And this "will se the light"
quite soon.
--
Totus tuus, Glebius.
GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040906063313.GB84269>