Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 00:42:23 +0100 From: Bruce Simpson <bms@fastmail.net> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, Ryan Stone <rstone@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r304436 - in head: . sys/netinet Message-ID: <1ebf4e2c-5fa1-29bc-0dc9-7ee2d7e2dc59@fastmail.net> In-Reply-To: <8ac23bd1-dcb3-7c64-f195-5039f9af0eaf@fastmail.net> References: <6f4449f2-d145-8b49-c3f0-433e8ff4d2a2@fastmail.net> <CAFMmRNypgJc00XH277oB3EEGje4xq%2B8_qcJfZu4jjBfTfa7GGQ@mail.gmail.com> <20160820173050.GQ22212@zxy.spb.ru> <CAFMmRNx=2v=M8GCBQ_cN4pnuZ4VnyzncwAgsqMUE=ebz7pkp2A@mail.gmail.com> <20160820184506.GV8192@zxy.spb.ru> <CAFMmRNy-e1uzdtz2cb5DAa9kRd%2BkHg%2BmWbf=HNDWVdGGjOPUWA@mail.gmail.com> <eb4c228e-8efe-b519-e85b-87800b3ec7a1@fastmail.net> <0f42c5fb-f930-c6e3-75d6-df97f67c201d@fastmail.net> <20160820204106.GW8192@zxy.spb.ru> <0acba141-4701-d9c2-0ddb-46d1f60ff55b@fastmail.net> <20160820220510.GX8192@zxy.spb.ru> <8ac23bd1-dcb3-7c64-f195-5039f9af0eaf@fastmail.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21/08/16 00:25, Bruce Simpson wrote: > On 20/08/16 23:05, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: >> In router case receiving broadcast packet in any way need additional >> check for dst IP address (host part is all zero or all one? what about >> handling this broadcast type (RFC talk about conroling variation of >> this)? what about sysctl control of receiving routed broadcast >> packets? what about handling 255.255.255.255?) > > I believe most of this is already special-cased in ip_fastfwd.c (which > gnn@ of course has merged, as it's full of sensible FIB-like operators > which most router forwarding planes adopt on *their* IP input paths up > to the forwarding decision), assuming the Ethernet input path colours > packets with the right flags. Just for reference, many of these 'sensible FIB operators' in the former ip_fastfwd.c came from the experience of James Jun at Towardex Systems. I merged his patch on the job whilst staying in Berkeley, CA and working on XORP at ICSI. I was only too happy to do that on their ticket, as it covered a lot of little performance cases which the pure rtalloc() fallthrough made us wince about.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1ebf4e2c-5fa1-29bc-0dc9-7ee2d7e2dc59>