On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 8:33 AM, Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > : > FreeBSD has moved most of their ppp, atm, pppoe, and other features > : > to netgraph and ours are pretty decrepit so getting this working > : > post-release will be a big benefit to our network stack. > : > :I'm on record as saying I think we should axe netgraph completely, > :rather than updating it. NetBSD and OpenBSD do no have netgraph > :and they have working ppp, pppoe, and atm, so clearly netgraph is > :not required for ppp, pppoe, and atm. In fact, the big problem > :I have with having netgraph in our system is then unsuspecting > :newbies might think they have to use it to do their networking work. > :I've never met anyone who tried to used netgraph who didn't curse its > :very existence. > : > : Jeffrey > > Well, netgraph is a big black box to me too but it is also > compartmentalized very well and rather easy to port. The APIs are > not moving targets and porting netgraph means we can use all the > various utilities that work under it, such as mpd. > > Ok, I do have an ulterior motive here. I would like DFly to > support mpd. > > In anycase, regardless of all of that, just from looking at it I > can see that it has one other bright spot, which is that it does > not interfere with the any of the *REST* of our networking code. > > -Matt > Matthew Dillon > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
Hi, I can volunteer to maintain netgraph7 after the compatibility issues have been resolved. I have already done some work to update it [1] but never comited it (couldn't test it enough). Cheers, Nuno [1] http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~nant/wip/netgraph-20080223.diff.bz2
