From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 18 12:21:27 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A260716A41F; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:21:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nork@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sakura.ninth-nine.com (sakura.ninth-nine.com [219.127.74.120]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BABE43D46; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:21:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nork@FreeBSD.org) Received: from nadesico.ninth-nine.com (nadesico.ninth-nine.com [219.127.74.122]) by sakura.ninth-nine.com (8.13.3/8.13.3/NinthNine) with ESMTP id j9ICLN6p055540; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 21:21:25 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from nork@FreeBSD.org) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 21:21:23 +0900 From: Norikatsu Shigemura To: Doug Rabson Message-Id: <20051018212123.8865775e.nork@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200510171012.20801.dfr@nlsystems.com> References: <2b22951e0510141758x1edef8jf7caf2514c336514@mail.gmail.com> <200510171012.20801.dfr@nlsystems.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.1.3 (GTK+ 2.6.10; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0 (sakura.ninth-nine.com [219.127.74.121]); Tue, 18 Oct 2005 21:21:25 +0900 (JST) Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, avatar@mmlab.cse.yzu.edu.tw, freebsd-firewire@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: fwe -> fwip in GENERIC? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:21:27 -0000 On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:12:18 +0100 Doug Rabson wrote: > The fwip implementation should be fully compatible with the RFC > standard. I'm happy for fwip to replace fwe in GENERIC unless anyone > else has an objection. I disagree. Because fwip and fwe can exist together. So I think that fwip should be added to GENERIC. > On Saturday 15 October 2005 03:35, Katsushi Kobayashi wrote: > > 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" > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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" > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-firewire@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-firewire > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-firewire-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"