netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: tun device - bug or feature? WAS(Re: IMQ / new Dummy device post.

To: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: tun device - bug or feature? WAS(Re: IMQ / new Dummy device post.
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:38:06 -0700
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1082816083.1054.32.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <wazza.87ad18jbdl.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> <1082427350.1034.70.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <wazza.87fzayw1fy.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> <wazza.87fzaxmr6x.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> <wazza.87hdvddqxq.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> <1082639764.1059.81.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <87oepjx65r.87n053x65r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1082719745.1057.27.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1082816083.1054.32.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On 24 Apr 2004 10:14:43 -0400
jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Jeff, Dave: Would it be fair to say when packets get injected into the
> stack by a netdev via netif_rx(), the skb headers are expected to be
> ponting into some specific places? I am not sure if theres a hard
> fastened rule defined anywhere.

What do ipv4 tunnels do?  They merely modify 'nh' and 'mac' ".raw" and
pass the packet in.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>