Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 16:59:05 -0400 (EDT) From: "Alok K. Dhir" <adhir@iagi.net> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> Cc: Brad Midgley <brad@pht.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.org, junkmail@pht.com Subject: Re: CAP status in current? Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.950524165443.7305A-100000@bigdipper.iagi.net> In-Reply-To: <95May23.165853pdt.49871@crevenia.parc.xerox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 23 May 1995, Bill Fenner wrote: > In message <Pine.LNX.3.91.950523141059.5507A-100000@exodus.pht.com> you write: > >I've been wondering if -current compiles Columbia Appletalk cleanly. > > I was under the impression that netatalk would make more sense, since it puts > more of the protocol handling in the kernel. I haven't looked at this stuff > for a while, though... NetAtalk is definitely the way to go. CAP is written fom the perspective of a Macintosh networking, requiring an in-depth understanding of Appletalk/Ethertalk/etc to get it working, whereas NetAtalk is written from a TCP/IP networking perspective. As I understand it, NetAtalk is also a faster implementation due at least in part to its being a kernel level implementation(instead of needing bpfilter, etc). Anyone have any ongoing work along these lines? Alok K. Dhir Internet Access Group, Inc. adhir@iagi.net (301) 652-0484 Fax: (301) 652-0649 http://www.iagi.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.91.950524165443.7305A-100000>