On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 17:05 -0700, Erik Nordmark wrote:
> On 3/17/11 2:37 PM, River Tarnell wrote:
> > I believe the fix is for sppp (or sppptun) to mark the packet as IFT_PPP
> > rather than IFT_ETHER. This would cause ip_mdata_to_mhi to ignore it
> > entirely, and since at this point the PPPoE frame cannot be multicast or
> > broadcast, there would be no loss of functionality.
>
> Yes, a driver which doesn't use Ethernet headers shouldn't claim to be
> an Ethernet in the dl_info_ack.
>
> Erik
Agreed 100%. What we see is this *appears* to be done for the benefit
of snoop, but I'd love to hear from Jim Carlson or someone else familiar
with the code.
My gut instinct here is it would be better to define DL_PPP and have the
PPP use it. Modifying snoop to support such would take two additional
lines in a table in snoop_ether.c, since we already have support
interpreting PPP headers (for PPPoE) in the code...
What are we missing?
- Garrett
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
networking-discuss@opensolaris.org
