Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "capturinig".
Did you mean:
capturing
2015 Jul 18
2
[syslinux:firmware] efi: Add network support
...a, 0, sizeof(udata));
> + udata.AcceptPromiscuous = TRUE;
> + udata.AcceptAnyPort = TRUE;
Why promiscuous? That seems to want to accept it on any local address
and put the NIC into promiscuous mode, avoiding the default MAC filter
in the NIC. This should be uncessary as we're not capturinig.
> +/**
> + * Establish a connection on an open socket
> + *
> + * @param:socket, the open socket
> + * @param:ip, the ip address
> + * @param:port, the port number, host-byte order
> + */
> +void core_udp_connect(struct pxe_pvt_inode *socket, uint32_t ip,
> +...
2015 Jul 20
1
[syslinux:firmware] efi: Add network support
>>>
>
> Why promiscuous?? That seems to want to accept it on any local address
> and put the NIC into promiscuous mode, avoiding the default MAC filter
> in the NIC.? This should be uncessary as we're not capturinig.
If I remember correctly, this was required for TFTP boot because
otherwise it's impossible to accept DHCP packets when we have no IP
address assigned. I'm not suggesting that is the intention of the AcceptPromiscuous
flag, only that it was the observed behaviour on my test machine....
2015 Jul 20
0
[syslinux:firmware] efi: Add network support
...; + udata.AcceptPromiscuous = TRUE;
> > + udata.AcceptAnyPort = TRUE;
>
> Why promiscuous? That seems to want to accept it on any local address
> and put the NIC into promiscuous mode, avoiding the default MAC filter
> in the NIC. This should be uncessary as we're not capturinig.
If I remember correctly, this was required for TFTP boot because
otherwise it's impossible to accept DHCP packets when we have no IP
address assigned. I'm not suggesting that is the intention of the
AcceptPromiscuous flag, only that it was the observed behaviour on my
test machine.
Then...