[lwip-devel] [task #14724] socket level ARP cache APIs

[Joel Cunningham]

URL:
  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?14724>

                 Summary: socket level ARP cache APIs
                 Project: lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack
            Submitted by: jcunningham
            Submitted on: Fri 10 Nov 2017 03:25:42 AM UTC
                Category: socket/netconn
         Should Start On: Fri 10 Nov 2017 12:00:00 AM UTC
   Should be Finished on: Fri 10 Nov 2017 12:00:00 AM UTC
                Priority: 5 - Normal
                  Status: Need Info
                 Privacy: Public
        Percent Complete: 0%
             Assigned to: jcunningham
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
         Planned Release: None
                  Effort: 0.00

    _______________________________________________________

Details:

I'm needing socket level ARP cache APIs to execute etharp_add_static_entry and
etharp_remove_static_entry from outside of the LwIP context

I did some research and within UNIX there are ioctls (SIOCSARP, SIOCDARP and
SIOCGARP) for interacting with the ARP cache. I wanted to get people's
thoughts on implementing these before going forward with the implementation
for the following reasons:

 1) This isn't an open group standard, but historic UNIX
 2) It appears that some UNIX OS's have deprecated/removed these in favor of
using routing sockets. These appear unsupported on current FreeBSD and NetBSD.
Linux has these implemented, but I believe using netlink via NETLINK_ARPD is
the preferred approach

Linux implementations: http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/arp.7.html

Steven's Unix Network Programming Vol. 1 has a good description of the
original UNIX implementation for me to go off of including the only source
which explains about struct arpreq: "arp_ha is a generic socket address
structure with sa_family set to AF_UNSPEC and sa_data containing the hardware
address (e.g., the 6-byte Ethernet address)."

Given that LwIP doesn't have anything fancy like netlink or routing sockets,
these ioctls seem the most appropriate to me




    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?14724>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.nongnu.org/