| To: | "B. James Phillippe" <bryan@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Tracking iterations in net_bh |
| From: | Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:54:36 +1100 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | Your message of "Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:51:17 -0800." <Pine.LNX.4.10.9912182240560.16239-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In message <Pine.LNX.4.10.9912182240560.16239-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you write:
> Greetings,
>
> I have a kernel application (firewall driver) which wants to be able to
> tell if, for example, the packet I am looking at in the output chain is the
> same one that came in on the input chain.
This is hard ATM: consider fragmentation. Other than this, you can
use the nf_mark/fwmark field.
If the router plugin architecture suggested goes in 2.5, then tracking
packets could be one side effect, since the frag code could keep this
association intact:
http://arl.wustl.edu/~dan/papers/rt_plugins_sigcomm98.pdf
Rusty.
--
Hacking time.
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful?, Cacophonix Gaul |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Tracking iterations in net_bh, B. James Phillippe |
| Previous by Thread: | IPv6+Linux status page useful?, Peter Bieringer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Tracking iterations in net_bh, B. James Phillippe |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |