From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 16 10:43:27 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from birch.ripe.net (birch.ripe.net [193.0.1.96]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1BC837B69D for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:43:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from kantoor.ripe.net (kantoor.ripe.net [193.0.1.98]) by birch.ripe.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA28063; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:43:07 +0100 (CET) Received: (from marks@localhost) by kantoor.ripe.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) id TAA13327; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:43:07 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:43:07 +0100 From: Mark Santcroos To: Julian Elischer Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: adding an address family Message-ID: <20010116194307.A28087@ripe.net> References: <20010116103212.C12906@ripe.net> <3A649154.B345C634@elischer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: <3A649154.B345C634@elischer.org>; from julian@elischer.org on Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 10:22:12AM -0800 X-Handles: MS6-6BONE, MS32260-NIC, MS18417-RIPE Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 10:22:12AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > > So would it be possible to add another network stack at runtime or is the > > code not ready for that? > > we do this in ng_socket.c where we add our own protocol. Thanx, I didn't thought on the netgraph code. Is this likely going to replace all the implementations of the current supported network protocols? In other words, is netgraph the right way to go for me, or should I rather focus on the more static part and drop the idea of implementing it as a kernel module? Mark -- Mark Santcroos RIPE Network Coordination Centre PGP KeyID: 1024/0x3DCBEB8D PGP Fingerprint: BB1E D037 F29D 4B40 0B26 F152 795F FCAB 3DCB EB8D To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message