From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Chen Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] Multicast packet reassembly can fail] Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:11:08 -0500 Message-ID: <1256764269.3153.494.camel@linux-1lbu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Eric Dumazet , mhuth@mvista.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Stevens Return-path: Received: from hu47.mvista.com ([206.112.117.47]:43049 "HELO gateway-1237.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754714AbZJ1VDU (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:03:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 13:22 -0700, David Stevens wrote: > netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org wrote on 10/28/2009 11:25:39 AM: > > > I see the point you are making. I assumed, probably incorrectly, that > > since eth0 and eth1 have different IP address. I would get a complete > > series of fragments for each interface. Perhaps, I should really be > > looking up the stack to see why packets were dropped. Please correct me > > if I'm mistaken. The normal behavior is that application should be > > receiving either 2 (scenario 1) or 1 (scenario 2) packets. > > Steve, > If you didn't join the group on both interfaces, you won't receive > two copies in the first place; the unjoined NIC won't deliver anything > up the stack that isn't in it's multicast address filter. > > +-DLS Thanks for the inputs. I'll revisit the issue. Steve