Thirumalai Srinivasan wrote: > softmac also needs to be able to handle vni
It needs to, or it _would_ need to if we were to get rid of DLPI between IP and the link-layer? I assume you mean the latter. Either way, why provide numerous layers of software to support a dummy driver that does almost nothing? > cgtp or such other > virtual/pseudo drivers that are DLPI based. We'll have to make sure CGTP works with Clearview UV anyway, but your point is valid, and I think is greater in scope than pseudo drivers. Any DLPI driver for a MAC-Type that has no Nemo MAC-Type plugin cannot be supported by softmac. As Erik mentioned, PPP is currently in that boat. Also left-out are dinosaurs such as Token Ring and FDDI. > Today people can modinsert > a STREAMS module between the driver and IP, I don't know if it is > possible to achieve the equivalent with softmac after the initial setup > is done. Yes. The softmac driver is a Nemo MAC driver. It does not affect how dld and IP talk to one-another using STREAMS or any other mechanism. I think the general concern, however, is not related to the Clearview softmac, but with the ability to use ifconfig modinsert if there is no STREAMS queue between ip and dld. > Unlike data paths, or TCP/IP socket plumbing, here there isn't any great > performance benefit and let us stick to a single plumbing mechanism for > IP, either DLPI or non-DLPI-nemo, but not have both mechanisms and a > fallback. I would agree with you there. Unless we stand to gain something such as code simplification in the ip module, there's no compelling reason to make such a drastic change at this point. Regardless, it's simply not possible to do yet due to feature disparity. -Seb _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
