lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Bugs: bug #34683, IPv4 routing doesn't consider...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #34683: IPv4 routing doesn't consider source IP address
Submitter: | Amir Shalem <amirshalem> | ||
Submitted: | Sat 29 Oct 2011 10:49:13 AM UTC | ||
Category: | IPv4 | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | Change Request | Status: | Wont Fix |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | goldsimon |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
lwIP version: | CVS Head |
Jump to the original submission
Fri 21 Dec 2012 06:16:45 PM UTC, comment #14: |
Christopher Pow <cpow> |
Fri 21 Dec 2012 04:20:04 PM UTC, comment #13: I'm with Kieran's comment #4: I'm happy for lwIP not to support 2 netifs in the same subnet for now. |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 07 Dec 2011 10:40:52 AM UTC, comment #12: Yes, in this simple scenario '<----->' means the same physical network.
|
Max Galemin <mgalemin> |
Wed 07 Dec 2011 10:13:40 AM UTC, comment #11: By '<----->', you mean that lwIP and PC1/2 are on the same physical network without a router (i.e. only switches)? If so, that's not supported by standard IP routing, as far as I know.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 07 Dec 2011 09:25:17 AM UTC, comment #10: [lwIP NI1: 10.1.1.100/24] <-----> [PC1: 192.168.1.100/24]
|
Max Galemin <mgalemin> |
Wed 07 Dec 2011 07:53:10 AM UTC, comment #9:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 07 Dec 2011 02:49:28 AM UTC, comment #8: IP routing based on source IP address of the IP packet makes sense in case of multiple NI physically connected to the different subnets. Another scenario is using RF wireless network on L1/L2 which requires mapping of LwIP NI to the RF air interface.
|
Max Galemin <mgalemin> |
Sun 13 Nov 2011 04:09:34 PM UTC, comment #7:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Thu 10 Nov 2011 04:33:28 PM UTC, comment #6: I still think this falls outside of the set of things that a lightweight stack should include. |
Kieran Mansley <kieranm> |
Tue 08 Nov 2011 05:56:16 AM UTC, comment #5: Please note that "Multiple netif on the same subnet" is feature I need for unit-testing my code.
|
Amir Shalem <amirshalem> |
Tue 01 Nov 2011 12:47:32 PM UTC, comment #4: Supporting multiple netifs on the same subnet is one of those things that I'm happy for lwIP not to support to keep it lightweight. |
Kieran Mansley <kieranm> |
Sat 29 Oct 2011 07:59:16 PM UTC, comment #3: No need to change the patch, adding the define in that patch is not a big deal. I only wanted to discuss that define before actually making the change. When adding such a define, there may be other places (in the current code), which may also can be changed to smaller code for the single-netif case... |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sat 29 Oct 2011 07:49:19 PM UTC, comment #2: if I will change the patch to include #define, would you accept it?
|
Amir Shalem <amirshalem> |
Sat 29 Oct 2011 07:43:29 PM UTC, comment #1: Hmm, this is really only needed in your special case, I guess. Up to now, we didn't support having 2 netifs in the same subnet.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sat 29 Oct 2011 10:49:13 AM UTC, original submission:
I made ip_route() to consider the source IP address.
|
Amir Shalem <amirshalem> |
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 6 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2012-12-21 | goldsimon | Status | None | Wont Fix | |
Assigned to | None | goldsimon | |||
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
2011-10-29 | amirshalem | Attached File | - | Added 0001-make-ipv4-ip_route-choose-the-netif-by-the-source-ad.patch, #24239 | |
Attached File | - | Added 0002-ARP-entries-should-be-separated-not-only-by-destinat.patch, #24240 | |||
Attached File | - | Added 0003-Support-setting-static-arp-on-different-network-inte.patch, #24241 |
Powered by Savane 3.13-758e.
Corresponding source code
Posting my comment here per request from Simon Goldschmidt:
We have an embedded customer that has just adopted LWIP. They previously had a different stack and a configuration that had two network interfaces on the same subnet. I'd like to be able to provide them an LWIP implementation that allows them to carry their existing configuration forward.