From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sa...> - 2002-07-13 19:59:37
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Richardson <mcr@...> writes:
Michael> If it wasn't a control socket, then it calls new_port(), which then tries to
Michael> read a *req from the port. So, the logic seems to be that if it isn't a
Michael> control port (which we now ignore, or at least, listen to only looking for
Michael> EOF), then it must be data.
Michael> Is this understanding correct?
The logic is, it is a control socket, and if it hasn't got a "port"
structure for it yet, then it must be a new connection and we call new_port()
Also, my understanding of match_sock() was wrong - you comparing the source
socket rather than the destination so that can you identify the sender for
] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[
] mcr@... http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Finger me for keys
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Jeff Dike <jdike@ka...> - 2002-07-13 21:27:02
> The logic is, it is a control socket, and if it hasn't got a "port"
> structure for it yet, then it must be a new connection and we call
> new_port() on it.
Yeah. The control sockets aren't used for anything after the connection
is established except disconnect detection.
In the future, they might be used to pass configuration changes back and
forth, although I don't know what would be useful there. It can detect
MAC, and possibly MTU, changes from the data, and those are the only things
that come to mind.