Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:39:57 +0200 From: Alexander Motin <mav@mavhome.dp.ua> To: Nikos Vassiliadis <nvass@teledomenet.gr> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ng_bridge + ng_ksocket Message-ID: <494277BD.2030804@mavhome.dp.ua> In-Reply-To: <200812121612.34002.nvass@teledomenet.gr> References: <1229005383.00046904.1228994401@10.7.7.3> <200812121429.38205.nvass@teledomenet.gr> <49426962.5070809@mavhome.dp.ua> <200812121612.34002.nvass@teledomenet.gr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > On Friday 12 December 2008 15:38:42 Alexander Motin wrote: >> You need some daemon to handle any additional logic. One simple example >> I have send to you. Another one is MPD, implementing L2TP and >> PPP-over-UDP links. Mpd opens separate UDP socket in user-level which >> catches everything that wasn't caught by existing connected sockets in >> netgraph and dynamically creates and connects additional UDP sockets in >> netgraph to handle this traffic. > > Yes, that's what I meant. If you would consider the possibility > of adding L2 over UDP functionality to MPD. I am asking this, > since you've already done things like this for MPD and I suspect > that there are some bits already in place. Of course a simple > "I don't want to" or "no time" would be a fine answer:) There is some L2 over PPP RFC exists which itself can be transported over UDP or whatever else. It surely has additional overhead, but instead gives many of native PPP bonuses like authentication, encryption, compression, etc. I was thinking about implementing it, but I haven't found any other existing implementation and so dropped it. > OTOH you could also say that ethernet over UDP is conceptually > unrelated to PPP, which is what MPD does. Indeed. MPD is a PPP daemon. -- Alexander Motin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?494277BD.2030804>