| To: | Ole Husgaard <osh@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: PPP over X |
| From: | Dave Grothe <dave@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 10 Feb 2000 08:36:13 -0600 |
| Cc: | Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Henner Eisen <eis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxx, markster@xxxxxxxxx, mitch@xxxxxxxxxx, ak@xxxxxxx, marc@xxxxxxx, bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx, Linux STREAMS <linux-streams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | Gcom, Inc |
| References: | <200002092333.AAA05339@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <00021011490500.01926@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <38A2B348.B07A7398@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
To amplify a bit on what Ole said: The Linux STREAMS code (LiS) does a good job in being able to interpose complex and flexible protocol stacks below IP -- the _standard_ Linux IP. What it _cannot_ do, and would require some assistance from the kernel networking folks, is to run protocol stacks _above_ TCP or _above_ UDP. Every once in awhile I get a question from a potential customer about tunneling our SNA over a TCP connection in Linux. Without making a trip up to user space the answer always has to be "can't be done." The reason being that we can't configure our SNA code (STREAMS based) above TCP while keeping the messages in the kernel. (Having contributed this two-cents worth to this discussion, I feel somewhat embarassed in that I am leaving for a two-week vacation on Saturday and will not have an opportunity to read responses or comment further.) -- Dave (author of LiS) |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, Ole Husgaard |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, Matti Aarnio |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, Ole Husgaard |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: PPP over X, Matti Aarnio |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |