Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:33:35 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        archie@whistle.com (Archie Cobbs)
Cc:        ari.suutari@ps.carel.fi, archie@whistle.com, brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk, hackers@freebsd.org, cmott@srv.net
Subject:   Re: ipdivert & masqd
Message-ID:  <199701291733.KAA12218@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <199701290817.AAA22387@bubba.whistle.com> from "Archie Cobbs" at Jan 29, 97 00:17:37 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 	I did some investigations in the kernel land (not being
> > 	any expert on that), but it seemed like the ip_divert_ignore
> > 	flag was still set (from processing a outgoing packet) when
> > 	an incoming packet arrived.
> 
> Can I get a quick sanity check on something... the divert code is
> programmed under the assumption that ip_input() and ip_output()
> can never sleep (ie., no other packet can be treated before the
> function returns). This is true, right?

For the divert handler, you mean?  Yes.

You can build a state automaton that collects state and generates
outbound data at intervals different than the inbound data, though,
so long as you return immediately rather than blocking after each
inbound-to-the-divert-handler data item has been processed.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701291733.KAA12218>