From owner-freebsd-net Thu Dec 21 23:42:26 2000 From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 21 23:42:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from nw174.netaddress.usa.net (nw174.netaddress.usa.net [204.68.24.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AC1AD37B400 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 23:42:23 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 20125 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Dec 2000 07:42:11 -0000 Message-ID: <20001222074211.20124.qmail@nw174.netaddress.usa.net> Received: from 204.68.24.74 by nw174 for [213.226.6.17] via web-mailer(34FM.0700.4B.01) on Fri Dec 22 07:42:11 GMT 2000 Date: 22 Dec 00 00:42:11 MST From: John Smith To: Archie Cobbs Subject: Re: [Re: New netgraph features?] Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailer: USANET web-mailer (34FM.0700.4B.01) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Archie Cobbs wrote: >John Smith writes: >> Well, may be I didn't said exactly what I wanted to. >> If we use say, ksocket nodes as a tunnel, we will >> transfer the data - ok, but what about metadata? >> May be I should say 'to connect two netgraphs'? >> May be this is a lost cause, but that's why I'm asking. > >Yes, there would need to be some extra stuff. Here are some >quick possibilities.. > >- We'd need to enhace the definition of a netgraph address > to include, say, an IP address, eg.: > > $ ngctl msg 192.168.1.12:foo: blah blah Well, I was thinking about this. I would like to share this pre-idea and to receive your opinions. I have one question here. Why should it be limited to UDP... (or whatever protocol)? Are we going to loose something, if we, say, create special node for 'netgraph tunneling' (so that it may ot may not be included into a running kernel) then connect this node to another one, which will be used for 'transport' layer. Such a node could possibly be used to encode/decode the inter-netgraph messages. Other nodes' names then should include the transport layer address. This way I think we won't get limited to one protcol... = Comments? > >- Encode control messsages in their ASCII forms for transit > across the network > >- Pick a well known UDP port to be used for netgraph messages > and data packets > >- Create a node type that could listen on this port (using ng_ksocket) > and do the required encoding/decoding. > >-Archie > >________________________________________________________________________= _ >Archie Cobbs * Packet Design * >http://www.packetdesign.= com ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D= 1 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message