Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:35:55 +0900 From: Katsushi Kobayashi <ikob@koganei.wide.ad.jp> To: "Cai, Quanqing" <caiquanqing@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Tai-hwa Liang <avatar@mmlab.cse.yzu.edu.tw>, freebsd-firewire@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fwe -> fwip in GENERIC? Message-ID: <B9629BCB-48E9-405C-A837-04AC249F7E99@koganei.wide.ad.jp> In-Reply-To: <2b22951e0510141758x1edef8jf7caf2514c336514@mail.gmail.com> References: <2b22951e0510141758x1edef8jf7caf2514c336514@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Although I don't know the detail of fwe technology, I understand the technology is a proprietary one. It is better to provide a compatibility with RFC standard firewire over IP, if some volunteer are there. On 2005/10/15, at 9:58, Cai, Quanqing wrote: > Hi guys, > > When I was fixing bug kern/82727: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/82727, I found we use > fwe(Ethernet over FireWire) in GENERIC kernel, not fwip(IP over > FireWire). > But we all know that IP over FireWire is more widely used on other > OSes, and > now this bug is fixed, do we need change fwe to fwip? > > I talked it with Tai-hwa Liang, he agrees with me. But he suggests > me to > post here for more advices, since there might be some > considerations such > like backward compatibility or code size that makes re@ made this > decision. > > Please give you advice or opinion. > > Best > Cai, Quanqing > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch- > unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B9629BCB-48E9-405C-A837-04AC249F7E99>