Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 06:34:55 +0000 From: Anuranjan Shukla <anshukla@juniper.net> To: "mike@karels.net" <mike@karels.net>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Arch" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Roadmap for ifnet(9) for FreeBSD 11 Message-ID: <CFAC1D4D.16B51%anshukla@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <201405290537.s4T5b16Z033344@mail.karels.net> References: <20140529040425.GT50679@glebius.int.ru> <201405290537.s4T5b16Z033344@mail.karels.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Ruišs question, if I understand it right, yes wešll work on the patch based on comments and feedback. As is obvious, Juniperšs network stack has its own set of the drvapi functions that do very different things in some cases. One intent in the submission is to agree upon the API itself as a first step, because further along we are in our production/shipping cycles with this change the harder itšll be to pull off fundamental changes there. On 5/28/14, 10:37 PM, "Mike Karels" <mike@karels.net> wrote: >Marcel and others, is there more to the roadmap than making the ifnet >easier >to change? Could you outline a bit more of the roadmap? I know that >Juniper >has more levels in the hierarchy of interface data structures. What are >you >proposing that we change after this step? > >I'll also repeat the general part of Rui's question: > >R> This is indeed needed, but it would be nice to understand what would >happen if the community has comments about your patch. Will Juniper be >able to integrate back those comments? > > Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CFAC1D4D.16B51%anshukla>