From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G8xZ0-0007cv-FC for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 04 Aug 2006 04:09:58 -0700 Received: from web25221.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.146.176.207]) by mail.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.44) id 1G8xYy-0001iQ-HZ for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 04 Aug 2006 04:09:58 -0700 Message-ID: <20060804110949.78699.qmail@web25221.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 13:09:49 +0200 (CEST) From: Paolo Giarrusso In-Reply-To: <20060803214501.GA5677@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug? List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Jeff Dike , "Stephens, Allan" Cc: Paolo Giarrusso , user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Jeff Dike ha scritto: > On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:08:51PM -0700, Stephens, Allan wrote: > > Where I think my confusion is arising is in the details of how > the > > filtering > > controlled by the promiscuous setting is actually done. If a > packet > > with > > the "wrong" destination address arrives at an interface, who > checks to > > see > > whether the interface has been configured as promiscuous and > > passes/discards it > > accordingly? I have naively assumed that this was handled in > hardware > > on the > > NIC card in a real system, but is it really done by software? > Ah, a light goes on. I believe that it is done on the card. Yes, it is, you can set one (or even more, for special purposes) MAC addresses to accept on a card or configure it as "no hardware filtering done"; I've observed a network driver doing this, and I think set_mac is the hook for this. > > What I seem to > > be > > observing in my UML testing is that *nobody* is doing this > filtering, > > resulting in > > unwanted packets being handed to my protocol (which sits directly > on top > > of the > > Ethernet driver). > > And since UML doesn't have "cards", it may be that the driver > should do the > filtering at the bottom layer and it isn't. I agree too; we may check however if the network stack implements support for such "dumb" cards (probably by setting a flag) to avoid coding it ourselves. Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel