Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:29:56 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Allocating AF constants for vendors. Message-ID: <20070821232956.GT87451@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I trimmed the sender of this because I got it in private mail, that said I thought it was a good bunch of questions so I am replying to it. > 64? are you intending to bump AF_MAX or allocate them sequentially such > that adding another AF will require AF_MAX to grow a lot? > > In general this seems like a bad idea to me. I suggest you need to > (publicly) explain what you are doing and why this is a good idea. The goal here is to allow vendors to add their own constants without worrying about conflicting with FreeBSD constants. It will allow vendors to maintain some semblance of binary compatibility against FreeBSD. If you look at libpcap: http://cvs.tcpdump.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/libpcap/pcap/bpf.h?rev=1.15 You can see that Juniper has asked for some number of reserved "families", in our case, I think it would be a bit greedy to grow the list _just_ for Juniper, so I suggested something that would work for every vendor. As far as implementation details, either one works for me, do you have any particular preference? Other than the actual delta, will this have any noticeable negative impact that you can see? -- - Alfred Perlstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070821232956.GT87451>