Re: expected behavior of PF_PACKET on NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX device?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ben Greear
Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 - 6:31 pm

Stephen Hemminger wrote:
Ok, I guess that will fix the sniffing issues and any user-space 
bridging type applications.

Currently, VLAN devices offer the ability to 'reorder' the header and 
explicitly remove the VLAN
header.  I assume we keep this feature and have the AF_PACKET logic 
check the device
flags to see if it should insert the VLAN header for hw-accel vlans?

Either way, if we sniff the underlying device, we should always get the 
VLAN header.

What about drivers and filtering VLANs?  It seems there is still a 
difference between software
vlans and hw-accel in this case.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> 
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: expected behavior of PF_PACKET on NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX d ..., Stephen Hemminger, (Wed Oct 31, 12:33 pm)
Re: expected behavior of PF_PACKET on NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX d ..., Stephen Hemminger, (Wed Oct 31, 6:23 pm)
Re: expected behavior of PF_PACKET on NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX d ..., Ben Greear, (Wed Oct 31, 6:31 pm)