| To: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, rob@xxxxxxxxxxx, buytenh@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, gleb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ??? |
| From: | Michal Ostrowski <mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 3 Jun 2000 12:45:48 -0400 (EDT) |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.GSO.4.20.0006030945230.15626-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <3938611E.D074F254@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.20.0006030945230.15626-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
My $0.02 (CDN)... I think that one of the fundamental issues involved here is that the networking code relies on network devices and sockets as the basic packet accepting and packet generating objects. What we are seeing here is that we may want to have some other kind of basic object to work with (that is, if we don't want VLAN's to be represented by network devices). I would like to suggest that people take a look at the "netgraph" architecture for BSD. I think that the kind of issues that people have raised in this discussion can be dealt with in a much simpler manner in such an architecture. For those of you not familiar with netgraph, here's a link to an introduction, though a quick search will reveal many more resources: http://www.daemonnews.org/200003/netgraph.html Michal Ostrowski mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Previous by Date: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Rob Walker |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Slow TCP connection between linux and wince, kuznet |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |