From owner-freebsd-net Tue Jun 15 18:21: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mail-out2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.254.0.51]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D2B015203 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:20:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from justin@walker3.apple.com) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com ([17.129.100.225]) by mail-out2.apple.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA49294 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:20:59 -0700 Received: from scv3.apple.com (scv3.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (mailgate2.apple.com- SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id for ; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:20:51 -0700 Received: from walker3.apple.com (walker3.apple.com [17.219.24.201]) by scv3.apple.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26288 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:20:50 -0700 Received: by walker3.apple.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA00645 for freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199906160120.SAA00645@walker3.apple.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Multiple ethernet frames for IPX Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:20:51 -0700 From: "Justin C. Walker" Reply-To: justin@apple.com X-Mailer: by Apple MailViewer (2.105.dev) Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > From: Boris Popov > Date: 1999-06-15 04:31:38 -0700 > To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Multiple ethernet frames for IPX > Delivered-to: freebsd-net@freebsd.org > X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Hello, > > Yes, it is really works now. This is first public release of > if_ef driver which extends current functionality of existing ethernet > drivers. > > Below I'm put a part of README file included in the distribution. > If someone can review/test this work and give me any suggestions, critics > or anything else I'm will be very grateful. > > URL of driver archive > ftp://ftp.butya.kz/pub/ipx/ifef-1.0b0.tar.gz > > Ok, here is README: I have a couple of questions: How does this handle the problem of getting a forwarded packet back into the wrapper it needs (e.g., 802.3/SNAP)? Why is this better than, e.g., having stacks register for packet-type reception? I'd think this would perform better than the "virtual device" scheme. A (minor?) drawback is updating both stack and "driver family support" (e.g., ether_input()) to handle this. Thanks, Justin -- Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large * Institute for General Semantics | Manager, CoreOS Networking | Men are from Earth. Apple Computer, Inc. | Women are from Earth. 2 Infinite Loop | Deal with it. Cupertino, CA 95014 | *-------------------------------------*-------------------------------* To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message