In message <5ab1a9c5.9050...@grosbein.net>, Eugene Grosbein <eu...@grosbein.net> wrote:
>21.03.2018 3:09, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7048448/raw-sockets-on-bsd-operating-systems >> "Using raw sockets isn't hard but it's not entirely portable. For >> instance, both in BSD and in Linux you can send whatever you want, >> but in BSD you can't receive anything that has a handler (like TCP >> and UDP)." >> >> So, first question: Is the above comment actually true & accurate? > >Not for FreeBSD. Is it true for other *BSDs? >> Second question: If the above assertion is actually true, then how can >> nmap manage to work so well on FreeBSD, despite what would appear to be >> this insurmountable stumbling block (of not being able to receive replies)? > >nmap uses libdnet that provides some portability layer, including RAW socket >operations. >It uses bundled stripped-down version but we have "normal" one as net/libdnet >port/package. >You should consider using it too as convenience layer. Thank you. I will certainly look into this, however my needs are quite small and modest... probably so modest that a "convenience layer" wouldn't be a substantial help. _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
