From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Received: from g4t0015.houston.hp.com (g4t0015.houston.hp.com [15.201.24.18])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp1.hp.com",
	Issuer "VeriSign Class 3 Secure Server CA - G2" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46BD4201759
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from g4t0009.houston.hp.com (g4t0009.houston.hp.com [16.234.32.26])
	by g4t0015.houston.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D6585D9;
	Wed, 11 May 2011 16:37:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [16.89.244.213] (tardy.cup.hp.com [16.89.244.213])
	by g4t0009.houston.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B803C133;
	Wed, 11 May 2011 16:37:08 +0000 (UTC)
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin08-BVFB0OYcCDkxeOJ7qYcipaOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=ta8EsXSgTnRmES-soB-iOwFF5Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DC94BF6.5060302@visser.name>
	<BANLkTi=KGJ3GGJUQeuPpiJHKMcC5PCnoAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DCA1339.1010409@kit.edu>
	<BANLkTin08-BVFB0OYcCDkxeOJ7qYcipaOA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:37:07 -0700
Message-ID: <1305131827.8149.404.camel@tardy>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
Reply-To: rick.jones2@hp.com
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 16:29:49 -0000

On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 07:46 -0600, Dave Taht wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Roland Bless <roland.bless@kit.edu>
> wrote:
>         Hi Dave,
>         
>         On 11.05.2011 05:32, Dave Taht wrote:
>         > 1) in a wireshark analysis, the %interface part is lost
>         
>         
>         But your wireshark is listening on some specific interface,
>         isn't it? 
> 
> No. It is listening on the wildcard interface. Of which there are 8.

Doesn't the pcap header identify the interface in that case?

There is also still the issue (perhaps) of sampled traffic (eg sFlow)
which will have only what was on the wire at the sample point.  Although
presumably there will be some way (not necessarily easy) to work one's
way back through the switch hierarchy to see which host egress port must
have been used since link-local have to be unique with the broadcast
domain and won't traverse a router.

rick jones