From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 25 15:47:09 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA03521 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ref.tfs.com ([206.245.251.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA03505 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:47:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA00954; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606252247.PAA00954@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: Frame relay and ATM support: virtual interface per vpi? To: rminnich@Sarnoff.COM (Ron G. Minnich) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:47:02 -0700 (PDT) From: "JULIAN Elischer" Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Ron G. Minnich" at Jun 25, 96 08:25:27 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25 ME8b] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 ... err yukk! :) what do you mean "at the hardware"? does it have 4096 interrupt vectors and 4096 shared memeory buffers? I put it to you that there is only one driver running, with one 'instance' of itself, and that there is only one line to the outside, and one "packet's received" counter. (well there may be more I guess). I also guess that you can't run one at one speed and another at another speed... If you bring down the interface, they should all stop etc.etc. in other words, while your hardware might support 4096 VCIs I'll bet that I can make as good an argument for having one interface as you can for having many.. One might as well argue that ethjernet should be implimented by having a separate virtual interface for every machine for which there is an ARP table entry. I'm not really arguing AGAINST you rather than trying to understand the reasons being used as If I start writing something that will be available in FreeBSD as a standard interface (in much the same way that my SCSI interface is the standard interface for BSD scsi drivers) for VC based interfaces then I don;t want to have to REWRITE it too many times when I find that the original method is unworkable.. julian > 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 > > >