On Sunday 2010-10-24 14:34, Kfir Lavi wrote: >On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sunday 2010-10-24 10:54, Kfir Lavi wrote: >> >>>I will need to move Ethernet, ARP and IP packets. >>>What are my options regarding moving the packet modified with new >>>custom header from one process to another process? >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-process_communication lists ways of >> transferring data between programs. >> > >Thanks, >There is no mention in this page about Netlink. Netlink belongs to the class of sockets. >As I'm getting packets from the kernel via netlink, I would think it's >a good choice to continue using netlink. >I'm trying now to create a small example code using libnl. >What is your take on using netlink? For user-to-user communications, the code would be simple enough to not warrant the use of libnl. Neither is a nlmsghdr structure needed. My take is that I would not normally use Netlink for user-to-user communications. For one, you would need to know the PID of the other process, which is not always feasible to determine. Compare with a named PF_LOCAL socket where both processes only need to know a rendezvous point. Even TCP socket numbers are more predictable - and controllable even - than a random PID. Also note that due to Netlink's use of PIDs, you cannot access other PID namespaces. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
