From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 3 21:45:39 2004 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 BE60816A4CE for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2004 21:45:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 635E343D2F for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2004 21:45:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i63LjAkx026163; Sat, 3 Jul 2004 17:45:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)i63LjANo026160; Sat, 3 Jul 2004 17:45:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 17:45:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Bruce M Simpson In-Reply-To: <20040703121504.GR97102@empiric.dek.spc.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: if_fwe -> BURN_BRIDGES? 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, 03 Jul 2004 21:45:39 -0000 On Sat, 3 Jul 2004, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > Now that we have dfr's IP-over-1394 code in the tree, I suggest we > consider depracating if_fwe(4) as it's nonstandard anyway. What does > everyone else think? If the if_fwe code is present in FreeBSD 4.x, but dfr's new IP over firewire code isn't, I'd suggest a more gentle deprecation path so that 6.x and 4.x can talk to each other :-). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research