From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 17 12:36:25 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D88C3106564A; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:36:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37C38FC17; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:36:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E8EA46B7E; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:36:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:36:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" In-Reply-To: <20101215230640.K6126@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: References: <20101215230640.K6126@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Future of netnatm: looking for testers X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:36:25 -0000 On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > I would request two things: > > 1) the extra couple of months; this will not prevent the evitable removal > yet only defer it. Sounds good to me -- my goal is not to remove NETNATM, rather, the remove code that doesn't compile or work. I'm happy to sit on this for a while and see if things improve; fixing the former is great, fixing the latter would be even better :-). (I wonder if Harti is in a situation to test any of this still?) Robert > > 2) If anyone of you is using (or want to be able to (continue to) use) NATM > or can test things, I re-enabled it with most of the code in HEAD and > the patch is available for 8,x as well but need to work with somoene > to make sure it'll really work. I am willing to spend more time on it > if you send me an email. > > Best Regards, > Bjoern > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Author: bz >> Date: Wed Dec 15 22:58:45 2010 >> New Revision: 216466 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/216466 >> >> Log: >> Bring back (most of) NATM to avoid further bitrot after r186119. >> Keep three lines disabled which I am unsure if they had been used at all. >> This will allow us to seek testers and possibly bring it all back. > > If you have the ability to test (on 8.x or HEAD) or are using NATM, > please get in contact with me. > > > >> Discussed with: rwatson >> MFC after: 7 weeks >> >> Modified: >> head/sys/conf/NOTES >> head/sys/netinet/if_atm.c > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > Bjoern A. Zeeb Welcome a new stage of life. > Going to jail sucks -- All my daemons like it! > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/jails.html >