From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jun 25 05:27:35 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA21152
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 05:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from terra.Sarnoff.COM (terra.sarnoff.com [130.33.11.203])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA21146
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 05:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from rminnich@localhost) by terra.Sarnoff.COM (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA23871; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:25:28 -0400
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:25:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Ron G. Minnich" <rminnich@Sarnoff.COM>
X-Sender: rminnich@terra
To: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Frame relay and ATM support: virtual interface per vpi?
In-Reply-To: <199606242311.QAA03078@ref.tfs.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960625082415.23860A-100000@terra>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

virtual interface per vpi is what i'm doing for MINI. I have to: MINI 
looks like 4096 atm interfaces *at the hardware level*, so the carrying 
that through to the OS and applications makes sense. 

I vote for the virtual interface approach ...
ron

Ron Minnich                |"Inferno runs on MIPS ..., Intel ..., and AMD's
rminnich@sarnoff.com       |29-kilobit-per-second chip-based architectures ..."
(609)-734-3120             |  Comm. week, may 13, pg. 4. 
ftp://ftp.sarnoff.com/pub/mnfs/www/docs/cluster.html