On Thursday 20 November 2008 14:00:11 Randall Stewart wrote: > On Nov 19, 2008, at 5:33 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: > >> Its not new, its the same ip header.. > >> Its just you go into the mbuf chain and take out > >> the udp header... > > > > well you can't do that at the socket buffer becasue you've discarded > > the IP header. It may not even be in the mbufs you have. (though it's > > unlikely). After you've processed the UDP part the IP part is gone so > > you'd need to intercept the packet way earlier and then do your > > own UDP processing, (or maybe attach the IP header onto it with a > > tag). > > One would definitely have to do some work in udp_input() not a lot from > what I can tell... but it would take some work. > > Maybe good course is to use the socket(9) stuff, but add an option > that can set a "by-pass function" if the socket is udp... right > after you establish the INP the packet goes to, if the function is > set, you engage the bypass...
This sounds reasonable. One would only have to replace calls to udp_append in udp_input with the by-pass function et voila. Should be clean enough. There might be some problems with holding the socket lock, though. For the record, I don't like all the UDP-tunneling madness either, but it seems that we are stuck with it ... so we should at least try to come up with a somewhat reasonable implementation for this hackery. -- /"\ Best regards, | [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
