Re: option directive and turning on AOE

From: Sam (sah_at_softcardsystems.com)
Date: 08/31/04

  • Next message: Brooks Davis: "Re: option directive and turning on AOE" 
    Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:42:09 -0500 (EST)
To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>

    OK, once i get it up I'll look into these other avenues
    to see if they're a cleaner approach.

    On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Brooks Davis wrote:

    > On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:27:33PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
    >> Sam wrote:
    >>
    >>> I've added code to if_ethersubr.c:/ether_demux/
    >>> to queue up AoE frames as they appear. I followed
    >>> suit with other protocols and included my addition
    >>> inside of an #ifdef AOE. Where do I turn this on?
    >>> I thought perhaps just adding an 'option AOE' to
    >>> the config would do it, but it doesn't -- so clearly
    >>> I don't understand how the option directive works.
    >>> The config man page doesn't talk about option/device
    >>> directives ...
    >>>
    >>> I'm still looking, but a clue would be well received.
    >>
    >> Did you modify /sys/conf/options to tell it about your
    >> AOE option? If so, then you should have specified the name
    >> of a header file that the option would be #define'd into.
    >> Include that header file in if_ethersubr.c and you should
    >> have no problems.
    >>
    >> Incidentally, this might be an area when netgraph would be
    >> useful. Instead of having an AoE specific hook in the
    >> stack, you could have an AoE netgraph module that uses the
    >> existing netgraph hooks. It's just an idea, though.
    >
    > Another option might be a PFIL hook. There isn't one there now, but I
    > think I've seen talk of adding one. Actually, if we did that, we could
    > get most of the netgraph specific hooks out of the ethernet code.
    >
    > -- Brooks
    >
    > --
    > Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE.
    > PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4
    >
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Brooks Davis: "Re: option directive and turning on AOE"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: option directive and turning on AOE
      ... this might be an area when netgraph would be ... Instead of having an AoE specific hook in the ... >Another option might be a PFIL hook. ...
      (freebsd-arch)
    • Re: option directive and turning on AOE
      ... >>to queue up AoE frames as they appear. ... > of a header file that the option would be #define'd into. ... this might be an area when netgraph would be ... Another option might be a PFIL hook. ...
      (freebsd-arch)
    • Re: option directive and turning on AOE
      ... >> AOE option? ... this might be an area when netgraph would be ... Instead of having an AoE specific hook in the ...
      (freebsd-arch)
    • Re: A netgraph question.
      ... If there is a better way to achieve these goals too, please suggest them but I think netgraph is the way to go. ... The second part involves intercepting network packets and possibly manipulating them before they are allowed to proceed, ... I'm not sure if teh bpf filter assumes it has the whole packet or just the IP packet, but assuming your interface was em0, ... # hook the 'lower' hook of em0 to the bpf filter. ...
      (freebsd-net)
    • Re: option directive and turning on AOE
      ... >>make pfil have a netgraph hook. ... >>kinds of things in netgraph graphs. ... Thus IPSecKAME and FastIPSec could be loadable modules and it ...
      (freebsd-arch)