On wo, 14 nov 2018 11:17:36 +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > Hi Kurt, > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:01:36AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > > > > > On 04.11.18 21:49, Kurt Van Dijck wrote: > > > On za, 03 nov 2018 09:24:42 +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 07:40:48PM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote: > > > > > On vr, 02 nov 2018 12:32:19 +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > we will drop this packets soon or later... so drop it better ASAP. > > > > > > > > > > This is true, unless you monitor all j1939 traffic in 'promiscuous' > > > > > mode. I'm not sure if that hasn't been thrown away yet, and is something > > > > > designed to be used on a PC anyway. You could extend the check a bit. > > > > > > > > Same like with ipv4/ipv6/tcp/udp stacks, we do not process unrelated > > > > traffic. We capture RAW Ethernet traffic. In this case, in promiscuous mode we > > > > should capture RAW CAN traffic, not decoded J1939 traffic. Acked-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
