lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Patches: patch #5824, gratuitous ARP
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
patch #5824: gratuitous ARP
Submitter: | Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> | ||
Submitted: | Mon 26 Mar 2007 08:35:44 PM UTC | ||
Category: | None | Priority: | 3 - Low |
Status: | Done | Privacy: | Public |
Assigned to: | fbernon | Open/Closed: | Closed |
Planned Release: | None |
Jump to the original submission
Fri 30 Mar 2007 10:28:21 AM UTC, comment #12: |
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Fri 30 Mar 2007 10:19:30 AM UTC, comment #11: Just came across my mind: do we need to mark netif with NETIF_FLAG_ETHARP in src/netif/ethernetif.c even throught it's just a sample? |
Tai-hwa Liang <atliang> |
Fri 30 Mar 2007 10:11:51 AM UTC, comment #10: Ah, you're right. Thank you for the quick and correct fix. I was thinking about inverting the flag to NETIF_FLAG_NO_ETHARP... ;) |
Tai-hwa Liang <atliang> |
Fri 30 Mar 2007 09:23:07 AM UTC, comment #9: I think your patch is not good, because non-ethernet interfaces are not break, just because... NETIF_FLAG_ETHARP should only be used on ethernet devices (which can used etharp_ functions)!!! :)
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Fri 30 Mar 2007 09:16:26 AM UTC, comment #8: Hmm... this change breaks non-ethernet interfaces such like loopif, slipif and ppp since they did not have a valid netif->linkoutput().
|
Tai-hwa Liang <atliang> |
Wed 28 Mar 2007 09:24:48 AM UTC, comment #7: Ok, commited with Simon's request...
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Wed 28 Mar 2007 07:31:31 AM UTC, comment #6: ok for LWIP_ARP. Just, I don't understand "Including non-relevant comments in the patch"? Can you tell what part is? The /* LWIP_SNMP */ (and co)? If you confirm, I will try to avoid in patch file next time (but are you agree to commit like this, to avoid to have new changelog with "just add comments on #endif"?). |
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Wed 28 Mar 2007 07:05:09 AM UTC, comment #5: Including non-relevant comments in the patch makes it more difficult to read, I think. The 'core' of the patch seems OK. Only it would be good to #ifdef LWIP_ETHARP (or what it is called now?) the inclusion of etharp.h and the call to etharp_query(). If that's included, I'm happy with the patch. |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 27 Mar 2007 07:21:49 PM UTC, comment #4: Patch attach. Ok to commit?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Tue 27 Mar 2007 01:55:04 PM UTC, comment #3: No, gratuitous ARP is just to update all subnetwork devices that this host is inline (and to update their ARP cache, by example, when you change your LAN router by another one, it is very useful to avoid to wait ARP cache timeout). It is not used to detect any IP conflict (BTW, is someone got an Autoip/APIPA module?).
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Tue 27 Mar 2007 01:45:04 PM UTC, comment #2: Hm, is gratuitous ARP used also to detect duplicate IP addresses? If so, we're not waiting for an answer...
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 27 Mar 2007 01:05:14 PM UTC, comment #1: Some comments about that?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Mon 26 Mar 2007 08:35:44 PM UTC, original submission:
I would like to reactivate the "gratuitous ARP". In netif.c, in netif_set_ipaddr(), we can see :
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
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 5 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007-03-30 | atliang | Attached File | - | Added non-eth-arp.patch, #12343 | |
2007-03-28 | fbernon | Status | Works For Me | Done | |
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
2007-03-27 | fbernon | Attached File | - | Added netif.etharp.flag.patch, #12312 | |
Status | None | Works For Me |
Powered by Savane 3.13-caa5.
Corresponding source code
Yes, no, perhaps... Because file name is ethernetif, I could say "yes", but this skeleton can be used as sample - with change - for non-ethernet devices and I think "no", perhaps add it with a comment would be good. I will do that...