Re: ALLMULTI broken?

A.N.Kuznetsov (kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru)
Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:37:17 +0400 (MSD)


In article <m0yjWrR-000aOnC@the-village.bc.nu> you wrote:
: > will not work against anything without setting "PROMISC", no? Wouldn't
: > "ALLMULTI" be what I'd actual want to use?

: No you want to use SIOCADDMULTI/SIOCDELMULTI for the addresses needed really

I'd say: "You do not want to use neither IFF_PROMISC nor IFF_ALLMULTI
nor SIOC{ADD|DEL}MULTI. You DO want to use PACKET_{ADD|DROP}_MEMBESHIP" 8)

Even if the application does not use packet socket, it would
be better if it opened one and bound to corresponding multicast addresses.
At least, this solution is "reenterable" and fault safe.

Alexey Kuznetsov

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu