Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 16:39:47 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru> To: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FrameRelay support for cx/ctau adapters Message-ID: <20040507123947.GA97635@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040507162633.G61288@woozle.rinet.ru> References: <20040507160253.B61288@woozle.rinet.ru> <20040507121738.GA97302@cell.sick.ru> <20040507162633.G61288@woozle.rinet.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 07, 2004 at 04:31:08PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: D> GS> FreeBSD has support for FR with help of nodes ng_frame_relay and ng_lmi. This D> GS> support is hardware independent. And it works perfectly with cronyx adapters. D> GS> What is a reason for merging hardware specific support from old cronyx driver into D> GS> base system? D> D> Short answer: keep POLA. D> D> Longer answer: to keep 4.x systems with _existing_ fr setup up to date, D> non-intuitive and non-atomic patches are now required. D> D> BTW: we have more than one perfectly (for particular meaning of 'perfect', os D> course ;-) working firewall systems, more than on (3) ppp inplementations, and D> more than one software raid implementation. I do not see any harm in existing D> another (working!) implementation for fr then, especially when it does so D> little bloat to the code base. From the point of FreeBSD cronyx driver appeared 1 month ago, and was not supported before. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040507123947.GA97635>