Well, there was a spot or two where I want to clean up a touch of formatting...that's trivial, though.
Add a set of "indent" rules to the source package, and just make sure that people run "indent" with those rules before checking in new versions of their code.
Each author is then free to re-"indent" to their own taste when they're editing, as long as they "indent" back to repository standard before checking in changes. CVS allows you to run pre-checkin scripts, which is where you'd do stuff like indent to repository standard before doing diffs at commit time.
I'm a little concern with the removal of the padding handling.
Missed the details there - is that where the code is adjusted to just skip 6 bytes here and there? That's on my list of things to read over in my copious spare time :)
One thing I have noticed is that Cisco injects "Offset" to make the data fields start on a longword boundary (32 bits). I'd like to know what the difference in efficiency is between sending Cisco IOS products L2TP packets with "Offset" versus the current implementation of "Length" - they both achieve the same result, but I suspect that "Length" will incur processing overheads as the Cisco has to check that the Length is correct. But I don't have Cisco equipment to test against.
A laudable goal...one that I'd like to see come to pass as well...but I'm thinking its a better bet to start with a fresh code base
But.. but.. I'm emotionally attached to the l2tpd code now! :)
We'll be checking through the rp-l2tpd codebase soon (once we've got over our current administrative headaches) and choosing which codebase best suits our future plans.
By the time kernel support is properly implemented, the code will look nothing at all like the current codebase - so we may as well pick one that needs work anyway ;)
