Date: Fri, 05 Jul 1996 16:47:13 +0000 From: Matt Thomas <matt@lkg.dec.com> To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org, tech-net@netbsd.org Cc: ewv@boom.bsdi.com Subject: My thoughts on ATM for *BSD. Message-ID: <199607051647.QAA23702@whydos.lkg.dec.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
While I away at the IETF, there was a discussion about ATM posted to the freebsd-hackers mailing list. However, since I am going to be discussing is not specific to FreeBSD, I'm also sending this to the tech-net mailing of NetBSD. For those of you who haven't seen it, you might want to check out the paper about IP Switching on http://www.ipsilon.com. Unlike Ethernet or FDDI, there is not a one-to-one correspondence between an ATM adapter and the number of interfaces for the system. Indeed, ATM might best be represented by a layered approach similar to what is done with SCSI. In a traditional system, you will have one or more Classic IP networks and possibly additional emulated LANs. However, it is unlikely that most ATM adapters will care about that. What they will need is a minimalist interface which ties in just below the signalling layer (possibly even not needing a singalling layer in some environments). This means that a MI signalling layer, classic IP, etc is needed. Hopefully that code can reuse existing software such as VINCE (ftp://ftp.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/pub/vince/). My current concern is the driver interface to signaling and data movement. FWIW, I've given up on ATMworks 350 because it uses a 21050 PPB and that will just lockups on Triton-based motherboards. I'm currently working on the next generation card after the 350. -- Matt Thomas Internet: matt@3am-software.com 3am Software Foundry WWW URL: http://www.3am-software.com/bio/matt.html Westford, MA Disclaimer: I disavow all knowledge of this message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607051647.QAA23702>