interrupt-based winpcap functionality?

[bmishoe]

As an improvement to a VI I'm working on, I was wondering if anyone knew of a 3rd party LLB I could use that would give me interrupt-based access to the network interface.

I found a Winpcap for Labview project here:

http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/WinPCAP-for-LabView-v-0-1-alpha/td-p/343479?view=by_date_ascending

Using the llb included with that project, I am able to sample packets off of my network interface.  Each time I click the 'read' button, it reads the network interface and gives me a data dump of the packet.  This is what I want...however, as you know network traffic is variable, and if I write a program that makes use of this read functionality, then it would rely on my loop being fast enough, which it may or may not be.

What I'm interested in is an interrupt based approach that I could use to execute an event structure each time there's a packet, and buffer said packet if necessary for future processing.

Thanks in advance.

[Wayne_T]

bmishoe,

I wasn't able to find any public sources for such LLBs.  I found references where others have attempted it like on lava.org, but still doesn't look like anything prebuilt.  

[bmishoe]

no problem, thanks for checking 🙂

Do you have a good reference for how to build my own llb, preferably from C code, assuming I find source code?

[nathand]

---

bmishoe wrote:

Do you have a good reference for how to build my own llb, preferably from C code, assuming I find source code?

---

Sorry this doesn't directly address your question, but it's a good idea to get terminology right. You can't build an LLB out of C sources. An LLB is a library of LabVIEW VIs (and they're not generally recommended these days, anyway).

What you want to build is a DLL. Search this forum and on LAVA for sample code that shows how a DLL can trigger event or an occurrence in LabVIEW, which will get you an approximation of interrupt-driven behavior. You're probably on your own after that in terms of linking it to WinPCAP.

[bmishoe]

thank you for that clarification...