Artem Kachitchkine wrote: > Materials for "PSARC/2004/571 Nemo - a.k.a. GLD v3" demonstrate > remarkable levels of thoroughness in specifying so many interfaces, but > ironically does not seem to include an interface table or a clear > statement of the stability classification.
The 20 questions document (found in the commitment materials) question 13 has all of the interfaces and their classifications. 2005/396 "Nemo MAC driver interface classification" modifies the MAC driver interfaces to be Consolidation Private. > Presence of two contracts > allows me to guess that they are Contracted Consolidation Private. I > also find that a followup case "PSARC/2006/249 Nemo Changes for Binary > Compatibility" lists these as Consolidation Private. Sowmini tells me > all consumers that initially required contracts are now in ON and > contracts are not needed anymore, so CP they are. Note that there's no difference between Consolidation Private and Contracted Consolidation Private, other than putting a contract in place for a Consolidation Private interface automatically makes it Contracted Consolidation Private. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/policies/interface-taxonomy/ > > Anything I said is incorrect? I'd add that it would be good to expose these Nemo cases to the OpenSolaris community. -Seb _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
