This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Inside each packet is a hardware (MAC) address. When a computer receives a particular packet, it checks the hardware address in it to see if the packet is addressed to it. If not, then the network card normally drops the packet. When in promiscuous mode, the network card doesn't drop the packet, thereby enabling it to read all packets.
I have understand that NIC checks packet against both given IP or MAC depending on protocol. Since MAC address cannot be used to send packets to outside of local network. So if I'm correct, this section of the article is little misleading..? 195.163.176.146 11:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I checked many places, but there's always just meantioned the listening part. But what about sending? Especially when using virtual machines, don't they depend on the NIC beeing able to switch the MAC for sending also? Is that not related to promiscuous mode? Is it done? How? Samorost1 ( talk) 07:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Modern virtualization NICs filter IP and/or MAC address depending on the installed virtual machines and applications. When would the term "promiscuous mode" apply to such a NIC? In backwards-compatibility situations only?
For example, suppose a NIC is implementing a node-assisted IP multicast. The MAC address is useless in that application. Does that make it promiscuous? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.250.35 ( talk • contribs) 17:56, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
In the opening paragraph (my emphasis added):
In computer networking, promiscuous mode or promisc mode is a mode for a wired network interface controller (NIC) or wireless network interface controller (WNIC) that causes the controller to pass all traffic it receives to the central processing unit (CPU) rather than passing only the frames that the controller is intended to receive.
I believe this would be more accurate if it described passing traffic to the driver, network stack or sniffing application rather than to the CPU. The CPU does do the processing, but the traffic is passed from the NIC to the driver to the network protocol stack or sniffer. Dave Braunschweig ( talk) 15:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The use of word CPU would be more accurate when the processor in question is specifically programmed for the purpose or is a special purpose processor. Normally the processors in such switches are general purpose processors and the processing unit is fabricated for switching purposes alone. The use of word CPU puts me to think as if processor processes the packets and NOT the software instructions that are run by processor.
Things become worse when someone follows the link attached to CPU (central processing unit) because the link talks about general purpose processors which is completely off-topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripunjaytripathi ( talk • contribs) 14:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Am I correct in my belief that some have "promiscuous mode" and some do not? If so, I think it would be helpful to include a list of those network adapters that have this ability, or at least provide a means for people to determine it for themselves. I assume it's a technical specification that may not explicitly say "promiscuous mode capable". Jonny Quick ( talk) 01:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Should this say “collision domain”? The rest of the paragraph mentions using switches to limit malicious use of promiscuous mode, but a switch only limits the collision domain not broadcast domain as I understand things. Neil.E.Madden ( talk) 20:31, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Inside each packet is a hardware (MAC) address. When a computer receives a particular packet, it checks the hardware address in it to see if the packet is addressed to it. If not, then the network card normally drops the packet. When in promiscuous mode, the network card doesn't drop the packet, thereby enabling it to read all packets.
I have understand that NIC checks packet against both given IP or MAC depending on protocol. Since MAC address cannot be used to send packets to outside of local network. So if I'm correct, this section of the article is little misleading..? 195.163.176.146 11:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I checked many places, but there's always just meantioned the listening part. But what about sending? Especially when using virtual machines, don't they depend on the NIC beeing able to switch the MAC for sending also? Is that not related to promiscuous mode? Is it done? How? Samorost1 ( talk) 07:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Modern virtualization NICs filter IP and/or MAC address depending on the installed virtual machines and applications. When would the term "promiscuous mode" apply to such a NIC? In backwards-compatibility situations only?
For example, suppose a NIC is implementing a node-assisted IP multicast. The MAC address is useless in that application. Does that make it promiscuous? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.250.35 ( talk • contribs) 17:56, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
In the opening paragraph (my emphasis added):
In computer networking, promiscuous mode or promisc mode is a mode for a wired network interface controller (NIC) or wireless network interface controller (WNIC) that causes the controller to pass all traffic it receives to the central processing unit (CPU) rather than passing only the frames that the controller is intended to receive.
I believe this would be more accurate if it described passing traffic to the driver, network stack or sniffing application rather than to the CPU. The CPU does do the processing, but the traffic is passed from the NIC to the driver to the network protocol stack or sniffer. Dave Braunschweig ( talk) 15:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The use of word CPU would be more accurate when the processor in question is specifically programmed for the purpose or is a special purpose processor. Normally the processors in such switches are general purpose processors and the processing unit is fabricated for switching purposes alone. The use of word CPU puts me to think as if processor processes the packets and NOT the software instructions that are run by processor.
Things become worse when someone follows the link attached to CPU (central processing unit) because the link talks about general purpose processors which is completely off-topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripunjaytripathi ( talk • contribs) 14:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Am I correct in my belief that some have "promiscuous mode" and some do not? If so, I think it would be helpful to include a list of those network adapters that have this ability, or at least provide a means for people to determine it for themselves. I assume it's a technical specification that may not explicitly say "promiscuous mode capable". Jonny Quick ( talk) 01:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Should this say “collision domain”? The rest of the paragraph mentions using switches to limit malicious use of promiscuous mode, but a switch only limits the collision domain not broadcast domain as I understand things. Neil.E.Madden ( talk) 20:31, 19 October 2019 (UTC)