Ok. Maybe the tapif.c should be updated in ports/unix/netif because
that's where I got the hairbrained idea to remove the ethernet header.
-rishi
P.S. I've written a unix driver that actually binds to eth0 (or other
device) and operates there. This allows you to test inter-computer
communication in unix (tap/tun seem to only work on the machine
running the program and no other machine can access this). Is this
something that is useful to the community?
On May 1, 2008, at 2:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rishi Khan wrote:
So, if you call NETIF_FLAG_ETHARP, they you should leave the
header alone, but if you don't call NETIF_FLAG_ETHARP, you should
leave it there. Doesn't that seem weird? Why should the TCP/IP
stack handle ARP? This is inherently an ethernet problem.
Just for better understanding, the handling of ARP packets has
changed in 1.3.0:
Previously they were indeed handled by the 'ethernetif' code. The
problem was that this way, the ARP table wasn't protected against
concurrent access (from receive thread an tcpip_thread - when
sending). This was solved by letting the tcpip_thread handle ARP
packets, which is the reason why ethernet netifs have to pass the
complete packet, not only the IP part.
Simon
_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
