From owner-freebsd-tokenring Tue Apr 21 14:07:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23980 for freebsd-tokenring-outgoing; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 14:07:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-tokenring@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from snoopy.lucentmmit (smtp.Lucentmmit.com [38.160.171.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA23886 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 21:07:13 GMT (envelope-from MCambria@lucent.com) Received: by smtp.Lucentmmit.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) id <2BP7W6F5>; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 17:20:45 -0400 Message-ID: <813D2854D1B0D1118236006097177581036B28@smtp.Lucentmmit.com> From: "Cambria, Mike" To: "'tokenring@freebsd.org'" Subject: RE: Current work... Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 17:20:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-freebsd-tokenring@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matthew N. Dodd wrote: Also remember that all our data rides around in 802.2 packets so we have those headers to deal with as well. Do we plan on supporting both SNAP headers and IEEE headers? IP can use both, some protocols can use only one or the other. MikeC Michael C. Cambria Lucent Technologies Member of Technical Staff Bell Labs Innovations Voice: (978) 287 - 2807 300 Baker Avenue Fax: (978) 287 - 2810 Concord, Massachusetts 01742 Internet: mcambria@lucent.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-tokenring@freebsd.org [SMTP:owner-freebsd-tokenring@freebsd.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 4:41 PM To: Larry S. Lile Cc: tokenring@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Current work... On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, Larry S. Lile wrote: > Yes, but there is some minimum and some maximum and by default we should > pick some arbitrary point and let each driver adjust it to fit its > insertion speed. Also source routing can (I think) can affect the > header size of the packets. We need to set our min and max based on line speed and let the user adjust to some value between if they desire. Min will probably be the same for both. Routing info only takes 30 octets, so we have to consider that as well. Also remember that all our data rides around in 802.2 packets so we have those headers to deal with as well. Eventually, our frame type code will deal with MTUs instead of ethernet/fddi/tokenring. The device will still determine the hard MTU but we have to have a way of supporting multiple MTUs per i/f. We don't really need to worry about that for now. If you like, you can do what the FDDI code did and just use all the ether_* stuff. /* Matthew N. Dodd | A memory retaining a love you had for life winter@jurai.net | As cruel as it seems nothing ever seems to http://www.jurai.net/~winter | go right - FLA M 3.1:53 */ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-tokenring" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-tokenring" in the body of the message