Do we ever want to bind more than 8 multicast MAC addresses?
dwmw2 at infradead.org
Fri Apr 18 11:54:31 EDT 2008
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 11:50 -0400, Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos wrote:
> what's possible? why not?
> David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 11:43 -0400, Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos wrote:
> >> Is it possible to associate shared activities with ethernet ports
> >> instead of whole multicast addresses? Then we would only need one single
> >> multicast address and do the filtering on the ethernet ports (eg IP is
> >> port 0x0800). At the very least, the multicast address is 6 bytes and
> >> the ethernet port is 2 bytes.
> > That's possible, yes -- although you won't get the device filtering it
> > for you then.
Error. Question upside down. Please don't top-post.
It's possible to do as you say -- to use different ports for different
activities (although I read 'UDP ports' where you actually said
'ethernet ports' so perhaps I misunderstood).
The device firmware doesn't speak IPv6 or Legacy IP, however -- and we
wouldn't want it to, even if we trusted it. So it wouldn't filter for
only those ports you're interested in; it'll give you all packets for
More information about the Devel