From: Karl H. <ka...@hi...> - 2011-07-29 21:46:38
|
On 7/29/2011 12:30 PM, chas williams - CONTRACTOR wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 21:10:38 +0200 > Francois Romieu<ro...@fr...> wrote: > >> Eric Kinzie (contractor)<ek...@cm...> : >> [...] >>> Changing the -p option to "1" will put an ethernet header in each pdu. >>> See rfc 1483 section 4.1 for a description of the "routed" configuration >>> (-p 0). >> A short explanation of the skb_pull(skb, ETH_HLEN) for e_vc/p_routed in >> br2684_xmit_vcc would be welcome. >> >> I do not see how there can be ETH_HLEN excess bytes in this direction. >> > yeah, i think this skb_pull() is wrong. when a routed interface is > setup, it shouldnt be prepending ethernet headers on the outgoing > packets so there shouldnt be any need to remove an ethernet header. > > anyone willing/capable of testing a patch? > FWIW I tested br6684 with a ADSL DSLAM I have access to, in routed mode about a year ago with 2.6.32 and all worked fine. Since then I haven't tested routed RFC2684 in some time. -- Karl |