Robert Watson wrote:
I had a fair amount of time over the last week running in disconnected
operation, and realized I had too many cables under my desk, so I spent a
bit of time exploring the FreeBSD console code.
Robert,
I just tried this out (version 0.4) and I like it!! Thanks for the
great
Terry Lambert writes:
If Linux is using 0x0666, we should probably pick a different number
since we're not wire compatible. Though coming up with a common
protocol would be even better.
0x666 hex is 1638 decimal, and it's taken:
cnip1638/tcp CableNet Info Protocol
cnip
Peter Jeremy wrote:
As with the Linux driver, communication happens at the ethernet link
layer, using protocol number 0x0666 (entertaining choice).
If Linux is using 0x0666, we should probably pick a different number
since we're not wire compatible. Though coming up with a common
protocol
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 12:30:41AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Peter Jeremy wrote:
As with the Linux driver, communication happens at the ethernet link
layer, using protocol number 0x0666 (entertaining choice).
If Linux is using 0x0666, we should probably pick a different number
since
Robert Watson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, Steve Kargl wrote:
This looks very interesting! Can we run ddb over the ethercon to debug
a wedged machine?
[ ... ]
To support ethernet debugging, the debugger would need to be able to drive
polling of the network interface in an
FYI, for those who expressed interest, the URL has changed slightly, and
I've posted some minor bugfixes and updates:
http://www.watson.org/~robert/freebsd/ethercons/
I'm also investigating the MOPRC protocol, and alternative ethernet
address choices. I did take a look at the Panasas ipgdb
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:13:27PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
After reading a FREENIX
paper this summer on a Linux ethernet console driver, I took a pass at
implementing ethernet console support for FreeBSD.
A very worthy cause. I'm sure this has come up before but I think
you're the first
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 06:26:18 +1000
From: Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MOP (as you point out later) or LAT have the advantage of being more
standard, but I'm not sure how well documented they are.
MOP is well documented. It is actually two protocols, one for
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:13:27PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
After reading a FREENIX
paper this summer on a Linux ethernet console driver, I took a pass at
implementing ethernet console support for FreeBSD.
A very worthy cause. I'm sure this
I had a fair amount of time over the last week running in disconnected
operation, and realized I had too many cables under my desk, so I spent a
bit of time exploring the FreeBSD console code. After reading a FREENIX
paper this summer on a Linux ethernet console driver, I took a pass at
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:13:27PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
I had a fair amount of time over the last week running in disconnected
operation, and realized I had too many cables under my desk, so I spent a
bit of time exploring the FreeBSD console code. After reading a FREENIX
paper this
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:03:52AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:13:27PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
I had a fair amount of time over the last week running in disconnected
operation, and realized I had too many cables under my desk, so I spent a
bit of time
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:13:27PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
I had a fair amount of time over the last week running in disconnected
operation, and realized I had too many cables under my desk, so I spent a
bit of time exploring the FreeBSD
13 matches
Mail list logo
