From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 28 19:12:56 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0162CE2; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:12:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from kagate.punkt.de (kagate.punkt.de [217.29.33.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8596426BB; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de ([217.29.45.10]) by gate1.intern.punkt.de with ESMTP id r9SIviij097570; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:57:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.29.46.102] ([217.29.46.102]) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r9SIviQv048428; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:57:44 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\)) Subject: Re: [heads up] axing AppleTalk and IPX/SPX From: "Patrick M. Hausen" In-Reply-To: <201310281648.r9SGmlQQ008874@smtp10.server.rpi.edu> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:57:44 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201310281648.r9SGmlQQ008874@smtp10.server.rpi.edu> To: drosih@rpi.edu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:24:27 +0000 Cc: stable@freebsd.org, glebius@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:12:57 -0000 Hi, all, Am 28.10.2013 um 17:49 schrieb drosih@rpi.edu: > I notice that CAP was removed from the ports collection some time ago, > and that there didn't seem to be any objections to that. So that's > some more indication that appletalk isn't seeing much use. I=92d guess the main reason is that Apple and Novell had enough = foresight to make their proprietary file sharing and printing protocols run over = IP. And for Apple this has been the case, since when? System 7.5.? Earlier, = even? I=92m curious what it is your are running in sufficient numbers to make = Appletalk mandatory? > As far as the kernel-level support, I assume you're just removing all > the code tied to the kernel options NETATALK and NETATALKDEBUG? Or = does > it entail some other changes, which might wreck my custom compile of = CAP? IIRC - and I used to use CAP a lot - it uses BPF to get the interface = into promiscuous mode and does all of the protocol itself. So as long as the upcoming = changes do not touch the BPF API, you should be fine. Kind regards Patrick --=20 punkt.de GmbH * Kaiserallee 13a * 76133 Karlsruhe Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100 info@punkt.de http://www.punkt.de Gf: J=FCrgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285