Re: [tcpdump-workers] [Bonding-devel] ethernet bonding + VLAN: additional VLAN tag in tcpdump

2011-12-15 Thread Thomas De Schampheleire
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Thomas De Schampheleire > wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 09:35:00PM CET, nicolas.2p.deb...@gmail.com wrote: Le 29/11/2011 14:38,

Re: [tcpdump-workers] capturing on both interfaces simultaneously

2011-12-15 Thread abhinav narain
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 4:10 PM, wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:53:38PM -0800, Guy Harris wrote: > > > > Will I ever see HT40+,40- in case of beacons. > > > > Probably not. > > > > > > Ok. So, there is nothing as a N beacon.. > > > Only advertisements at 1,6 rate and then actual data at N spe

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Eric Dumazet
Le jeudi 15 décembre 2011 à 14:22 -0800, Rick Jones a écrit : > On 12/15/2011 11:00 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > >> Device's work better if the driver proactively manages > >> stop_queue/wake_queue. > >> Old devices used TX_BUSY, but newer devices tend to manage the queue > >> themselves. > >> > > >

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Guy Harris
On Dec 15, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Rick Jones wrote: >> This may be of help. >> http://www.tcptrace.org/faq_ans.html#FAQ%2021 > > Given the behaviour seems to be (at least for the foreseeable future) a > "feature" is there someplace in tcptrace/tcpdump to mention this? The > tcptrace FAQ seems to h

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Rick Jones
This may be of help. http://www.tcptrace.org/faq_ans.html#FAQ%2021 Given the behaviour seems to be (at least for the foreseeable future) a "feature" is there someplace in tcptrace/tcpdump to mention this? The tcptrace FAQ seems to have stopped growing sometime in 2003 - I could I suppose m

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Eric Dumazet
Le mercredi 14 décembre 2011 à 18:12 -0800, Vijay Subramanian a écrit : > On 14 December 2011 11:27, Rick Jones wrote: > > While looking at "something else" with tcpdump/tcptrace, tcptrace emitted > > lots of notices about hardware duplicated packets being detected (same TCP > > sequence number an

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:32:56 -0800 Rick Jones wrote: > > > More exactly, we call dev_queue_xmit_nit() from dev_hard_start_xmit() > > _before_ giving skb to device driver. > > > > If device driver returns NETDEV_TX_BUSY, and a qdisc was setup on the > > device, packet is requeued. > > > > Later,

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Eric Dumazet
Le jeudi 15 décembre 2011 à 10:32 -0800, Rick Jones a écrit : > > More exactly, we call dev_queue_xmit_nit() from dev_hard_start_xmit() > > _before_ giving skb to device driver. > > > > If device driver returns NETDEV_TX_BUSY, and a qdisc was setup on the > > device, packet is requeued. > > > > Lat

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Rick Jones
On 12/15/2011 11:00 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: Device's work better if the driver proactively manages stop_queue/wake_queue. Old devices used TX_BUSY, but newer devices tend to manage the queue themselves. Some 'new' drivers like igb can be fooled in case skb is gso segmented ? Because igb_xmit_

Re: [tcpdump-workers] twice past the taps, thence out to net?

2011-12-15 Thread Rick Jones
More exactly, we call dev_queue_xmit_nit() from dev_hard_start_xmit() _before_ giving skb to device driver. If device driver returns NETDEV_TX_BUSY, and a qdisc was setup on the device, packet is requeued. Later, when queue is allowed to send again packets, packet is retransmitted (and traced