From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 12 17:26:23 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD90516A4BF for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:26:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xaqua.tel.fer.hr (xaqua.tel.fer.hr [161.53.19.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8A9643FDD for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:26:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from zec@tel.fer.hr) Received: by xaqua.tel.fer.hr (Postfix, from userid 20006) id DDB789B649; Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:26:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from tel.fer.hr (zg02-207.dialin.iskon.hr [213.191.130.208]) by xaqua.tel.fer.hr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98DC49B647; Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:26:19 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3F6263D4.D63B74F0@tel.fer.hr> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:24:53 +0200 From: Marko Zec X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce M Simpson References: <200309121505.15651.zec@tel.fer.hr> <20030912133903.GS44087@spc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-28.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) X-Sanitizer: Advosys mail filter cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New snapshot: network stack cloning / virtualization patches X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:26:23 -0000 Bruce M Simpson wrote: > Hi Marko, > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 03:05:15PM +0200, Marko Zec wrote: > > Network stack cloning patches allow for multiple fully independent network > > stacks to simultaneously coexistst in a single FreeBSD kernel. Combined with > [snip] > > Your work is most interesting. I look forward to using it as a resource > from which to learn when researching a prospective policy routing > implementation for the 5.2 line of development, after the locking work > has been finished. > > Have you considered porting your work to 5.x, perhaps as a Perforce project? Sure, however until now my plans for doing a port to 5.x were blocked due to ENOTIME|ENOFUN. I guess a good point for starting such efforts would be after 5.2 is released, when the recent changes -CURRENT network stack have settled down a little bit. I'll be in need for a lot of help and guidance with 5.x specifics though... Cheers, Marko