[Bridge] Bridge and PACKET-socket

Bart De Schuymer bdschuym at pandora.be
Tue Jan 13 11:35:26 PST 2004

On Monday 12 January 2004 23:14, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> I agree that dev.c is not confusing, but the PACKET(7) interface
> is. If you bind to ETH_P_ALL you will receive every packet, but if you
> bind to any other protocol you will only receive packets the bridge
> doesn't take. The manpage doesn't say anything about this, and one
> might actually want different semantics (as in my case). IMO it would
> be nicer to have an interface that treats "what protocol do I want to
> see" and "do I want bridged packets" as orthogonal.

Reading the man page is indeed confusing for a user, w.r.t. bridge ports.
I think it would be more logical if all PF_PACKETsockets see the frames before 
the bridge code.
How about placing the call to __handle_bridge() right after the second 
list_for_each? If I'm not mistaken the relevant pt_pre->func that would deal 
with the packet will not have been executed yet, while those PF_PACKET 
functions will already have been called...

If you want the opinion of someone more knowledgeable than my humble self, the 
network guru's are located at netdev at oss.sgi.com.


More information about the Bridge mailing list