of hairpinning?
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 10:49:09AM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 07:00:15AM +, Swarm NameRedacted wrote:
> > Not sure this applies. There's no NAT since everything is on the same
> > subnet.
>
> IIUC, packet is received
Not sure this applies. There's no NAT since everything is on the same
subnet.
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 09:33:36AM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 08:12:08PM +, Swarm NameRedacted wrote:
> > All fair points, I'll address them one by one.
>
that bridge.
Hope that makes sense. Please let me know if there's something I didn't clarify
fully that can be explained further!
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 03:39:22PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 08:19:57AM +, Swarm NameRedacted wrote:
> > Hi,
&
Hi,
I am trying to build a quick script via TC direct action and eBPF to
modify the destination IP of a packet so that it is routed through a
different bridge interface. Made a quick network diagram below to
demonstrate it.
Packet (dst: 10.10.3.2)
|
|
in
First time emailing to this mailing list so please let me know if I made a
mistake in how I sent it. I'm trying to receive a notification from the kernel
once it verifies an ACK packet in a handshake. Problem is, there is no API or
kernel resource I've seen that supports this feature for both sy
