directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Henne <j.he...@levigo.de>
Subject Re: DHCP protocol
Date Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:05:57 GMT
Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
> Well I've thought about it, and...
>
> Raw sockets are a nightmare - too platform-specific, quirky,
> inefficient (you get many packets you don't need to see) and require
> root access. But, it's the only way to unicast to a particular MAC
> address like the RFC says we should in some cases.
>   
Raw sockets (for example using RockSaw: 
http://www.savarese.org/software/rocksaw/) is something we considered. 
Wrapped in a corresponding MINA transport implementation this might not 
be too bad after all.
> Moving on - SO_BINDTODEVICE is also platform-specific and seems a bit
> of a hack (it changes how routing is done). Plus you need a socket per
> interface, which means you use more sockets, and if network interfaces
> are created or destroyed while the DHCP server is running it has to
> deal with it.
>   
That is correct.
> Using recvmsg() seems nice, it's only 1 socket, and it tells you where
> the packet came from.
>   
I didn't find a corresponding implementation of recvmsg() for Windows.

There is one more option: going not after the socket layer, but even one 
layer below using a packet capture interface (which, contrary to its 
name, can also inject arbitrary packets), e.g. as supported by this: 
http://netresearch.ics.uci.edu/kfujii/jpcap/doc/
A disadvantage is that it requires an installed PCAP driver.
> Little hope? When last I checked, Sun was accepting patches to Java :-).
>
> I've mailed the appropriate mailing list and offered to patch
> DatagramPacket and co to provide the packet's destination address and
> the NetworkInterface it came through, and they've sent me some
> preliminary code I can carry on from. So, luck witholding, it will
> make it into not just Java 7, but maybe even some of the prerelease
> builds.
>   
That sounds rather brilliant. Is this a cross-platform solution which 
also works on Windows?

> The bigbang branch seems much further ahead than trunk, I'm not sure
> there is much for me to do any more.
>   
Don't worry - there is :-)
The code on the trunk contains a proof-of-concept DHCP server 
implementation only. There is no functionality to look up clients from 
the directory, no configuration, no state (lease) management etc.

Joerg Henne

PS.: I'll treat myself to a week of holidays, so I won't be able to take 
part in the discussion over the next days, I'm afraid.

Mime
View raw message