From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald Welte Subject: Re: PF_RING: Include in main line kernel? Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:45:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20091018124506.GF27747@prithivi.gnumonks.org> References: <8B385E10-4BE2-48A6-BDE0-0AA1A603275E@ntop.org> <20091014203640.GB32317@ioremap.net> <4AD64251.50903@candelatech.com> <20091014.144923.112167161.davem@davemloft.net> <20091015070234.GA29506@ioremap.net> <4AD74EF1.6080106@candelatech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov , David Miller , deri@ntop.org, shemminger@vyatta.com, brad.doctor@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Greear Return-path: Received: from ganesha.gnumonks.org ([213.95.27.120]:60309 "EHLO ganesha.gnumonks.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754485AbZJRMrS (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:47:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AD74EF1.6080106@candelatech.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Ben, On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 09:33:53AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > Bonding, bridging, mac-vlans, pktgen-rx logic, sniffers, and others could. > The only trick is ordering...it may be better to keep the hard-coded hooks in > a definite order than to allow users to switch them around. why does this sound like the netfilter hooks with their priorities to me? The only difference is that netfilter hooks are inside the layer 3 protocols at the moment, whereas this is one layer lower... -- - Harald Welte http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)