From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 26 14:22:23 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11EF516A421 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:22:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A98F13C469 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:22:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 31791 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2007 13:33:19 -0000 Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([62.48.2.2]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 26 Jun 2007 13:33:19 -0000 Message-ID: <4681211F.2030607@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:22:23 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Ambrisko References: <200706252220.l5PMKVEX088397@ambrisko.com> In-Reply-To: <200706252220.l5PMKVEX088397@ambrisko.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ambrisko@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Net , Marko Zec , releng@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer , "Bruce M. Simpson" Subject: Re: Vimage virtual networking and 7.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:22:23 -0000 Doug Ambrisko wrote: > Bruce M. Simpson writes: > [snip] > | My concern is that vimage may be a very intrusive change indeed where > | these matters are concerned, unless the vimage patches are being kept > | up-to-date and regression tested as issues are resolved and new features > | added. > > Just like it was mostly working in 4.X then never worked with 5.X & 6.X > and now it sounds like it is working in 7.X but will it be working in > 8.X etc? That's a lot of effort he is putting in to keep going dead. > Note this comment is based on out-side observation. I know a few people > that used it in 4.X. I played with it bit. Yes, it would help IronPort. > I'd rather not have to keep merging it. I'm not involved in with the > FreeBSD network folks to know the scope and the missing bits. IronPort > might be able to help somewhat to accelerate it. IMHO it's too late to fit it into 7.x in a sane and non-bitrotting way. It should have gone in right after BSDCan at latest. The window has closed. -- Andre