On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 08:30:59PM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote:
> > Suppose someone uses 2:1:2:3:4:5 (11 chars), which I did for testing?
> I thought that was an invalid mac address?(I've never seen mac addresses
> specified that way on any software or hardware - yet)
A valid MAC is 6 binary bytes - I haven't seen anywhere that "02" is
the only valid ASCII representation of one of those bytes.
> Yeah, I preferred that too, it is also more consistent with the way the
> other transports do it, but it needed to be backwards compatible. Which
> can still be done, but only as long as:
> pcap-options!='[no]promisc!'='[no]optimize!'=mac-address='pcap'
> Isn't it the case already?
The original pcap specification would remain, and that would be your
backward compatibility.
> Acked-by: Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> works for me (tm)
Cool, I'll send it in.
Jeff
--
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
