netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC: PPP over X

To: Henner Eisen <eis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RFC: PPP over X
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:04:33 -0500 (EST)
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxx, Mark Spencer <markster@xxxxxxxxx>, mitch@xxxxxxxxxx, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Marc Boucher <marc@xxxxxxx>, paulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Michal Ostrowski <mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ben LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <ou7lgm2bbu.fsf@baty.hanse.de>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx

On 3 Feb 2000, Henner Eisen wrote:

> >>>>> "jamal" == jamal  <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>     jamal> -Hard coded for PPPOE -Creating a whole socket family for
>     jamal> just PPPOE is a bad idea (claim: Could make it for PPPOX
>     jamal> with type PPPOE, L2TP etc).
> 
> What about a generic ´ppp over socket´ paradigm which would eliminate
> the need of special protocol families for each ppp carrier?
> 
> I´was thinking about it like this:
> 

Other than the weird syntax you provided for the socket connect this
sounds quiet reasonable to me; domain=pppox, type=pppoe, protocol=0x8864
as an example ...
This is what i was saying to Michal (but not in so many words ;->).
In addition i think what is needed is a registration API at the kernel
so that all the common code is shared other than the encapsulation/send
recieve/decapsulation which is specific to the particular "PPP over X"
This way every new PPPOX doesnt have a new socket family and it adds only
the code specific to itself.

cheers,
jamal



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>