From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [148.163.129.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89B8E233712 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 19:24:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.129.49 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755890665; cv=none; b=F3q8RKkFeuPW45ErrrmNOPAwYd3c5OqQwUIUouPBz3M2a1QhfrlbssnGdZ4C/QuiZMkNr01jNbYDaFbC+cCLlDxCtebxKb384rXell9105YH2ySoJBeRj+lVT3rEyWJWmzf6EXLqt+WSoiuWh4Eu/wUNcc1/+1vVW7aurYeYcVk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755890665; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rfPq/J7l2T+JDVXyO9nKv5RoHQJOiNzGNitpLYhet5k=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:To:From:Subject:Content-Type; b=gp/7LZzWKHoyxGyK66qjyQ8C49dOVk6AKU52FT37u188mAmM+y9SYKfY6L1eQ1ER7uAc4yFqvhfNamUmvZEer7Yeh3hE09aqZ298lNioUuTv7vIfO6/yBOwDAAdaZBVqJAyyOabosBN6/ojKOgAEJ8fiKAc/JchZWBp+ynHUoTU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=candelatech.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=candelatech.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=candelatech.com header.i=@candelatech.com header.b=F0BNBUYT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.129.49 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=candelatech.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=candelatech.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=candelatech.com header.i=@candelatech.com header.b="F0BNBUYT" Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (ip6-localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (PPE Hosted ESMTP Server) with ESMTP id 5E13C2CE7EE for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 19:16:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Proofpoint Essentials engine Received: from mail3.candelatech.com (mail.candelatech.com [208.74.158.173]) by mx1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (PPE Hosted ESMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4F66BA800BD; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 19:16:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.100.159] (firewall.candelatech.com [50.251.239.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail3.candelatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B991F13C2B0; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 12:16:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail3.candelatech.com B991F13C2B0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=candelatech.com; s=default; t=1755890187; bh=rfPq/J7l2T+JDVXyO9nKv5RoHQJOiNzGNitpLYhet5k=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:From; b=F0BNBUYTXGM2njkomPRQuWlstBLkGXM29xwS2xnyTqilGubRH0FTqzF4S0Q+sAlcH p/Dv6jY+0iqqVZlh61n6a21Z2QeKAsZSyfW7HDoqYH0Om9LhIQ7bjipOb7wACVyC6P TzGojQLxDXkxANLu4m5t7G6jecOD4UQ142q1t0nE= Message-ID: <39bf5755-254b-e7b8-cc15-500be99d0a6b@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 12:16:27 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1 Content-Language: en-US To: David Ahern , linux-wireless From: Ben Greear Subject: VRF and UDP broadcast frames Organization: Candela Technologies Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MDID: 1755890189-baLc69HsIe27 X-PPE-STACK: {"stack":"us5"} X-MDID-O: us5;ut7;1755890189;baLc69HsIe27;;abcb0bc45f5ce597c813a23c027ae4ed X-PPE-TRUSTED: V=1;DIR=OUT; Hello, Assume I have a network interface assigned to a VRF (wifi AP interface is what I'm testing now). I would like to have it be able to send and receive UDP broadcast frames. I am binding the socket to the AP netdev with SO_BINDTODEVICE. From what I can tell, the socket at least cannot receive UDP broadcasts sent to it. I do see the broadcast arriving on the AP interface if I run tshark. Is there any particular issue with UDP broadcast sockets in VRF? Do I have to instead bind to the vrf netdev instead of the ap netdev? And always possible I doing something wrong in my socket code, my current test setup is quite complicated. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com