| To: | Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: PPP over X |
| From: | Henner Eisen <eis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 07 Feb 2000 20:06:17 +0100 |
| Cc: | Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Ostrowski <mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxx, Mark Spencer <markster@xxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Marc Boucher <marc@xxxxxxx>, Ben LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | Mitchell Blank Jr's message of "Sun, 6 Feb 2000 05:38:20 -0800" |
| References: | <Pine.GSO.4.20.0002031710390.25544-100000@shell.cyberus.ca> <00020616582804.06510@argo.linuxcare.com.au> <20000206053819.X9170@sfgoth.com> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
>>>>> "Mitchell" == Mitchell Blank <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Mitchell> Could a single connection to the ppp unit represent
Mitchell> multiple unrelated bundles?
Don't know whether this is already implemented in the generic ppp code.
But isdn ppp (doesn't use the generic ppp yet) has allways done it like
this and I'm not aware of any problem reports related to this.
That might be the best proof that the concept is correct.
Henner
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: IPv6 + AH + ESP, Michael H. Warfield |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, Henner Eisen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, Paul Mackerras |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |