[Charles Wilkinson <c_s_wilkinson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

--- Guy Harris <gharris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Charles Wilkinson wrote:
> 
> > Yes there is a protocol ID in the IP header that
> tells
> > ethereal that this is MAC in MAC encapsulation.
> 
> If there's an IP header in the middle, I'd describe
> that as 
> MAC-in-something-sort-of-like-IP-in-MAC, not
> MAC-in-MAC (which wouldn't 
> require IP).
> 
> > Furthermore the IP header had slitghtly different
> > fields than the normal IP haeder so it seemed
> > justified to alter IP.c in order to intercept
> ethereal
> > at the IP  level.
> 
> Different in what way?
> 
> > Furthermore the IP header has 6
> > octets added to it, which are not part of the
> classic
> > IP header.
> 
> Added at the end?  If so, they could also be
> considered a header for the 
> MAC-in-IP protocol, rather than part of the IP
> header.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-dev mailing list
> Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
> 



		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com