Best way to hook incoming eth pkts?

3 messages, 2 authors, 2003-08-20 · open the first message on its own page

Best way to hook incoming eth pkts?

From: Jeff Garzik <hidden>
Date: 2003-08-20 15:47:27

All,

netconsole, netdump, and ATA-over-ethernet (and others?) all have a need
to directly send and receive ethernet packets from inside the kernel.

The sending part is easy and obvious.  The receive part isn't.

Essentially, all the things mentioned above need some way to listen
for incoming ethernet packets.  ATA-over-ethernet has its own
IANA-registered ethernet type, but netconsole and netdump are using
IP/UDP instead of a custom ethernet protocol.

So, two questions for the gurus of the crowd ;-)

1) What is the best way for an in-kernel piece of software to 
receive ethernet packets that are intended for it?

2) Possibly related to #1, is it a good or bad idea to consider sending
netconsole/netdump directly over ethernet, eschewing the IP/UDP/syslog
stuff?

Comments and insight requested.

	Jeff

Re: Best way to hook incoming eth pkts?

From: Bryan O'Sullivan <hidden>
Date: 2003-08-20 17:48:17

On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 08:47, Jeff Garzik wrote:
ATA-over-ethernet has its own
IANA-registered ethernet type, but netconsole and netdump are using
IP/UDP instead of a custom ethernet protocol.
This is useful, because it minimises the work needed to get them going
over other transports, such as Myrinet.  I'd rather not see the UDP
encapsulation go away.  Netconsole is already messy enough to configure
and deal with; Matt Mackall's 2.6 forward port, that makes configuration
more IP-oriented instead of less, is a step in the right direction.

	<b

Re: Best way to hook incoming eth pkts?

From: Jeff Garzik <hidden>
Date: 2003-08-20 17:51:41

On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:48:17AM -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 08:47, Jeff Garzik wrote:
quoted
ATA-over-ethernet has its own
IANA-registered ethernet type, but netconsole and netdump are using
IP/UDP instead of a custom ethernet protocol.
This is useful, because it minimises the work needed to get them going
over other transports, such as Myrinet.  I'd rather not see the UDP
encapsulation go away.  Netconsole is already messy enough to configure
and deal with; Matt Mackall's 2.6 forward port, that makes configuration
more IP-oriented instead of less, is a step in the right direction.
Configuration has zero to do with the protocol of choice.

I fully agree that current RH netconsole/netdump configuration is
positively awful...

	Jeff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help