From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Apr 17 05:35:29 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id FAA04697 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 17 Apr 1996 05:35:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoke.microwiz.com (smoke.microwiz.com [206.100.22.130]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA04692 for ; Wed, 17 Apr 1996 05:35:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jpm.microwiz.com (jpm.microwiz.com [206.100.22.140]) by smoke.microwiz.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA12917 for ; Wed, 17 Apr 1996 05:36:10 -0700 Message-Id: <199604171236.FAA12917@smoke.microwiz.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "John McNamee" Organization: MicroWizards To: questions@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 05:36:20 PST Subject: User vs. Kernel PPP Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.31) Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I've Read The Fine Manual and searched the mail archives for this, but I can't find an explanation of the tradeoffs between user and kernel mode PPP in 2.1R. I'm running kernel PPP now, because I had to blindly pick one and I assumed that a kernel implementation would be more efficient. I'd like to get some real information to either confirm that choice or give me a reason to switch. My primary use of PPP is supporting async dialup users. I connect to the Internet with an Ascend Pipeline router, so "outbound" PPP features like dial on demand don't matter in my environment. Having said that, I'm sure that future users who search the mail archives would appreciate replies that cover both sides. -- John McNamee MicroWizards Software Development Services Voice: 702-825-3535 / FAX: 702-825-3443