Christian S.J. Peron wrote: > I think that tap(4) is a bit different since the only kind of frames it > handles are Ethernet. As Andrew points out the tapwrite check probably isn't needed now. > This is not the case for bpf(4). I wonder if it > makes sense to add this check into ether_output()? IIRC bpf will call > the network interface's output routine, in the Ethernet/bridge case it > should be ether_output(). > This approach avoids touching the device-independent paths, and, providing the check resides in the AF_UNSPEC case (as ARP resolution should do the right thing) is reasonably neat. But it doesn't handle the case where there are link-layer netgraph nodes between bpf and if_bridge, something which the first change would deal with. regards BMSReceived on Tue Aug 28 2007 - 18:37:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:16 UTC