From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 6 16:58:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19AA16A4CE for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:58:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8920A43D58 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:58:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iB6GuMxD075665; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 11:56:22 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)iB6GuM1l075662; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:56:22 GMT (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:56:21 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Poul-Henning Kamp In-Reply-To: <79552.1102327805@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] IPX and NWFS to be killed in -current. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:58:45 -0000 On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > We are aiming 6.X at production readiness around start of 2006. > > By that time IPX and NWFS are not really interesting and nobody seems to > be interested in doing the SMPng work on them. > > I propose we remove them from -current before the 6.x freeze starts next > spring. FYI, I have a substantial work in progress in the netperf branch to bring fine-grained locking to IPX/SPX, as well as to clean up a number of elements of its implementions (for example, moving the the queue(9) macros. While I'm currently a bit stalled on it due to being overwhelmed at work (etc), my hope was to get the Giant-free IPX pieces working early next year. I think there's a reference to this on the SMPng page showing the task as last worked on in April (probably accurate). I don't have the ability to experiment with or test the nwfs code at this time. However, there are occasional bug reports so one assumes that someone must be using it. I'm not necessarily opposed to removing IPX/SPX on the basis that it is hardly a mainstream protocol component anymore, but I think it's probably not accurate to say that no one is interested in doing the locking work for the IPX parts (since I'm working on it :-). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research