[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.
cheers,
Bart
More information about the Bridge
mailing list