From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 17 20:08:23 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B93316A403; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:08:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50BB143D9F; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:08:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from frontend3.internal (frontend3.internal [10.202.2.152]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5899FDA79E3; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:08:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.internal ([10.202.2.161]) by frontend3.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:08:06 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: 4t3TCz7n/r3AIPxew/7fq8X8dMSV1WFnoMg0cU4BDnHo 1158523686 Received: from [192.168.123.18] (82-35-114-57.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.114.57]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744DA2FDB; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:08:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <450DAB24.6060107@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 21:08:04 +0100 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060825) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <200609171333.k8HDXUht029746@repoman.freebsd.org> <450D8CA1.4020704@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <450D8CA1.4020704@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Andre Oppermann , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/bce if_bce.c src/sys/dev/bge if_bge.c src/sys/dev/em if_em.c src/sys/dev/ixgb if_ixgb.c src/sys/dev/nfe if_nfe.c src/sys/dev/nge if_nge.c src/sys/dev/re if_re.c src/sys/dev/stge if_stge.c src/sys/dev/ti if_ti.c src/sys/dev/txp ... X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:08:23 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > As I mentioned before, I am slightly uncomfortable with the > implementation of this > change as it puts protocol specific items into the protocol > independent mbuf header. > The fact that 99.99% of network traffic coming in and out of a > machine uses this protocol > at the the moment makes it understandable but if in 2 years a new > transport mechanism sweeps > the world for which this is irrelevent, or worse, has a different > requirement for similar fields, > are we going to add fields for that too? should this be defined as a > link layer specific union for > which we can add future variants? This argument seems a case of putting the cart before the horse -- it's a bit up in the air. If anything Ethernet is more likely to increase in popularity, and it is the most common use case. Particularly so, given that VLAN encapsulation is specified for 802.1p priority tagging, and there is more and more interest in L2 QoS because of VoIP. Kudos to Andre for sorting it out. Regards, BMS