Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 18:13:22 +0300 From: Roman Kurakin <rik@cronyx.ru> To: Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, vak@cronyx.ru Subject: Re: kern/11238, kern/14848, kern/21771, sppp patch's patch_id #1 Message-ID: <3BEAA112.6080001@cronyx.ru> References: <000901c1134b$827a69a0$48b5ce90@crox> <3BDABF7B.4060808@cronyx.ru> <3BE24EE4.2020506@cronyx.ru> <20011102192916.A43204@uriah.heep.sax.de> <3BE3ED17.3060603@cronyx.ru> <20011103182927.F43204@uriah.heep.sax.de> <3BE7E1E5.4040500@cronyx.ru> <20011106212839.K43204@uriah.heep.sax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
Joerg Wunsch wrote:
>As Roman Kurakin wrote:
>
>>>Probably. At least it was me who wrote larger parts of the current
>>>sppp implementation.
>>>
>>Original version was written by Serge Vakulenko ( vak@cronyx.ru
>><mailto:vak@cronyx.ru> ),
>>
>Sure. I didn't want to neglect Sergej's part. When i was in need of
>a PPP implementation for the ISDN project, i picked Sergej's sppp
>because it looked promising, and i thought it was basically the way i
>would have gone myself. OTOH, it needed a large overhaul to implement
>the basic concepts of the PPP RFCs (which you have not much been in
>need for when using it on hardware HDLC devices). This approximately
>doubled the size of the source code... that's why the comment above
>about my part in the current implementation.
>
I didn't want to neglect your's part, I just want to say that we (me and
Serge) also feel responsibility for this
code and we keep on development of it.
>>and we together keep on
>>development and fixing current version.
>>
>Much appreciated!
>
>>(we have numerous fixes in PPP and CISCO code and we could offer new
>>Frame Relay code).
>>
>Well, to be honest, both should IMHO be broken out into separate
>files. if_spppsubr.c is overly large already anyway, and both Cisco
>framing and FR don't have much in comming with SyncPPP except that
>they incidentally are all three applicable to the hardware HDLC
>devices Cronyx is producing. ;-) But technically, a user will
>
Our cards and most others implemet only HDLC in hardware and need
software implementation of
next protocol layers such as sppp implementation.
>almost certainly only run one of those framing technologies on his
>
>hardware (be it hardware HDLC or ISDN), and it would keep interfaces
>cleaner to break them out.
>
>What do you think?
>
I don't think that they should be broken out completely. Physicaly, yes
it will be better to
split them into separate files (core, ppp, fr, cisco). From my point of
view (Serge's as well )
logically it should be a single whole. It can be called "sppp" from the
historical reasons, but
I think now it is "sp" - "Synchronous Protocols".
spppcontrol should became spcontrol, interact with sp-core, allow to
switch between protocols
and set their parameters.
Best regards,
Kurakin Roman
>>>The downside of all this is that it takes a FreeBSD committer to do
>>>it (i expect some two dozens of committs approximately), and
>>>someone who's got quite a bit of time at hand.
>>>
>>I thought all FreeBSD developers have access to FreeBSD tree?
>>
>Yes, they have -- but you aren't one, thus i can't simply ask you to
>do it alltogether. ;-) Unfortunately, with a day job, a small kid, and
>a couple of other interesting hobbies, my time is fairly limited...
>I wish i had all of this and much more already done, honestly.
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BEAA112.6080001>