RE: Injecting a packet with explicit route.

Dear Karsten, > > > Definition of Windows 95: A 32-bit extension and graphical > > shell for a 16 Bit patch to an 8 Bit OS originally coded > > for an 4 Bit CPU, written by a 2-Bit Company that can't > > stand 1 Bit of competition. > That would make Windows 2000 the 64-bit sauce on the 32-bit ex

Re: Injecting a packet with explicit route.

David Preece([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.18 12:03:09 +: > Hi, > > Due to the wonder of IPFW and divert sockets I have been merrily catching > packets, modifying them and reinjecting back in from userland to great > effect for some time now. What I would like (need) to do is much the same, >

Re: Injecting a packet with explicit route.

David Preece wrote: > > Hi, > > Due to the wonder of IPFW and divert sockets I have been merrily catching > packets, modifying them and reinjecting back in from userland to great > effect for some time now. What I would like (need) to do is much the same, > but being able to explicitly state whi

Injecting a packet with explicit route.

Hi, Due to the wonder of IPFW and divert sockets I have been merrily catching packets, modifying them and reinjecting back in from userland to great effect for some time now. What I would like (need) to do is much the same, but being able to explicitly state which route to take (for a packet g