John Hay wrote:
> > > Why don't they use the netipx code? Surely netware use ipx.
> >
> > IPX is based on XNS.  It differs by one significant field.  The
> > SAP (Service Advertisement Protocol) in IPX comed directly from
> > XNS.
> So you are agreeing with me that to use netns to do ipx when we
> have netipx does not make sense? :-)
> > FWIW.
> I know, a lot of my time went into netipx, which was derived from
> netns. I also did IPXrouted which does SAP too.

I was mostly agreeing with Julian, that if people are using it, it
shouldn't be orphaned because something moved out from under some
otherwise perfectly good code.  A lot of people used to do 802.3
vs. Ethernet II, as well, and they did it for compatability with
legacy systems... so whether it makes technical sense or not, it
might make business sense.  8-).

I can't run -current on my SMP box, because -current changed out
of compatability with it (I think KMB and Poul have similar ASUS
boxes that have the same problem), but I've been working on setting
up a -current system locally, both to bring some patches up to date,
and to deal with the SMP initialization issue that's been a thorn
in the side of the -smp list.  It'd be pretty trivial to deal with
the XNS compilation problems, if they are more recent that 4.4, so
if it turns out they are, I cn do that pretty easily, once I have
a -current box that actually boots without panic'ing.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to