[Winpcap-users] correct usage of pcap_sendqueue_transmit?

[Adagio Grazioso]

GV,
To work around this, can we have a 'feature' which allows adding pkts to a
send queue with a caplen/len of 0? If this is supported, we can add a pkt
with a len of 0 to the end of the first sendqueue with the appropriate
timestamp.
Adagio
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 12:30 AM,  <winpcap-users-request at winpcap.org>
wrote:

> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:06:33 -0700
> From: "Gianluca Varenni" <gianluca.varenni at cacetech.com>
> Subject: Re: [Winpcap-users] correct usage of pcap_sendqueue_transmit?
> To: <winpcap-users at winpcap.org>
> Message-ID: <51CCC9A0A65248C88F022BB28D90AFA3 at NELSON3>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>        reply-type=original
>
> The usage is correct, indeed. However, pcap_sendqueue_transmit respects
the
> timestamps within the queue, but not between two different calls to the
same
> function.
>
> Suppose that the last packet in the queue has a timestamp of 10s, and the
> first packet of the next queue has a timestamp of 11s. When
> pcap_sendqueue_transmit transmits the second queue, it will not respect
the
> timestamp of the first packet(11s), it will send it immediately.
>
> Have a nice day
> GV
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Noam Cohen" <Noam.Cohen at harmonicinc.com>
> To: <winpcap-users at winpcap.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:09 AM
> Subject: [Winpcap-users] correct usage of pcap_sendqueue_transmit?
>
>
>> GV,
>> I have a PCAP file of 400MB which has to be played in endless loop. I
read
>> a packet and send it using the Transmit() described in the pseudo code.
>> In the wireshark tutorial, "sendcap", the whole file is added into the
>> transmit queue and then transmitted. This does not work with large files
>> (or when a loop play is needed).
>> In the Transmit(), I fill the queue with packets and when near fullness,
>> call pcap_sendqueue_transmit(). I would expect it to *clear* the queue
but
>> it does not happen. The only way I see to reuse the queue is to destroy
>> and then allocate it again. Is this the way it is meant to be ?!
>>
>> Are the packets which are added to the queue actually copied? I assume so
>> since there is no other mechanism to keep the memory valid.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Noam
>> _______________________________________________
>> Winpcap-users mailing list
>> Winpcap-users at winpcap.org
>> https://www.winpcap.org/mailman/listinfo/winpcap-users
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Winpcap-users mailing list
> Winpcap-users at winpcap.org
> https://www.winpcap.org/mailman/listinfo/winpcap-users
>
>
> End of Winpcap-users Digest, Vol 55, Issue 21
> *********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.winpcap.org/pipermail/winpcap-users/attachments/20091030/e01ce8bc/attachment.html