Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. trying to figure out if i suck at programming or if realtek has byte-reversed their own OUI in addition to bit-reversing it as the spec needs

trying to figure out if i suck at programming or if realtek has byte-reversed their own OUI in addition to bit-reversing it as the spec needs

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
20 Posts 5 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • azonenberg@ioc.exchangeA azonenberg@ioc.exchange

    @whitequark oh right JEP106 is JEDEC I'm mixing it up with something

    whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
    whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
    whitequark@social.treehouse.systems
    wrote last edited by
    #11

    @azonenberg JEP106 does however use the weird address space compression paging

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

      this can't just be me, right

      >>> hex(int("0000000000011100110010",2)) # what Realtek says
      '0x732'
      >>> hex(int("0000000000011100110010"[::-1],2)<<2) # what IEEE 802.3 says
      '0x4ce000'
      00-E0-4C   (hex)        REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORP.

      (what the IEEE list says)

      Link Preview Image
      darius@mastodon.cloudD This user is from outside of this forum
      darius@mastodon.cloudD This user is from outside of this forum
      darius@mastodon.cloud
      wrote last edited by
      #12

      @whitequark FYI FreeBSD has:
      Vendors do obviously not agree how OUIs (24 bit) are mapped to the 22 bits available in the id registers.
      IEEE 802.3u-1995, subclause 22.2.4.3.1, figure 22-12, depicts the right mapping; the bit positions are defined in IEEE 802-1990, figure 5.2.
      (There is a formal 802.3 interpretation, number 1-07/98 of July 09 1998, about this.)
      ...
      If a vendor uses a different mapping, an "xx" prefixed OUI is defined here which is mangled accordingly to compensate.

      whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • darius@mastodon.cloudD darius@mastodon.cloud

        @whitequark FYI FreeBSD has:
        Vendors do obviously not agree how OUIs (24 bit) are mapped to the 22 bits available in the id registers.
        IEEE 802.3u-1995, subclause 22.2.4.3.1, figure 22-12, depicts the right mapping; the bit positions are defined in IEEE 802-1990, figure 5.2.
        (There is a formal 802.3 interpretation, number 1-07/98 of July 09 1998, about this.)
        ...
        If a vendor uses a different mapping, an "xx" prefixed OUI is defined here which is mangled accordingly to compensate.

        whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
        whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
        whitequark@social.treehouse.systems
        wrote last edited by
        #13

        @Darius that doesn't tell me much

        darius@mastodon.cloudD 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

          @Darius that doesn't tell me much

          darius@mastodon.cloudD This user is from outside of this forum
          darius@mastodon.cloudD This user is from outside of this forum
          darius@mastodon.cloud
          wrote last edited by
          #14

          @whitequark just “vendors are idiots” but I suppose that isn’t news

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

            found another random PHY

            looks like the byte-reversal is not realtek's invention. but why the fuck is it needed?

            >>> hex(int('0000000000100010000101'[::-1],2)<<2)
            '0xa11000'
            Link Preview Image
            david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
            david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
            david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #15

            @whitequark

            A complete guess, but:

            A lot of networking equipment used big-endian MIPS until recently. Big-endian avoided a load of byte swapping for packet headers (this is effectively free on more complex cores) and MIPS basically gave away the R4K core when they were low on cash (unlimited-use licenses). It may be that Realtek did it deliberately to make it easier to read on big-endian MIPS, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they did testing on big-endian MIPS and forgot that they needed to byte swap, so it passed the tests and then they shipped it.

            whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

              @whitequark

              A complete guess, but:

              A lot of networking equipment used big-endian MIPS until recently. Big-endian avoided a load of byte swapping for packet headers (this is effectively free on more complex cores) and MIPS basically gave away the R4K core when they were low on cash (unlimited-use licenses). It may be that Realtek did it deliberately to make it easier to read on big-endian MIPS, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they did testing on big-endian MIPS and forgot that they needed to byte swap, so it passed the tests and then they shipped it.

              whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
              whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
              whitequark@social.treehouse.systems
              wrote last edited by
              #16

              @david_chisnall no, this isn't it

              david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

                @david_chisnall no, this isn't it

                david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
                wrote last edited by
                #17

                @whitequark Their DV team is made of vampires and they were hanging upside down when they got to this bit?

                whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                  @whitequark Their DV team is made of vampires and they were hanging upside down when they got to this bit?

                  whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
                  whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
                  whitequark@social.treehouse.systems
                  wrote last edited by
                  #18

                  @david_chisnall yes, but make it IBM. Realtek seems to be doing what everyone else is doing

                  whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

                    @david_chisnall yes, but make it IBM. Realtek seems to be doing what everyone else is doing

                    whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
                    whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
                    whitequark@social.treehouse.systems
                    wrote last edited by
                    #19

                    @david_chisnall as far as I can tell there is no rationale or justification, they fucked it up and now we all gotta deal with it forever

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

                      @david_chisnall yes, but make it IBM. Realtek seems to be doing what everyone else is doing

                      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                      david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
                      wrote last edited by
                      #20

                      @whitequark

                      Weird, that implies there’s some hiring overlap between IBM’s legal and DV teams.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      0
                      • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups