David Miller wrote: > From: Markku Savela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I think that is worse than allow a new driver to provide a simple > > service function which maps IPv4/6 multicast address into link layer > > address, when asked. > > The problem is that this mapping isn't so simple for several > link layer types.
But this mapping seems to be just a simple de-coupling tool, and any de-coupling by definition does/should not change the underlying implementation in any way, while allowing for a dynamic rather than a fixed/hardcoded relation between the layers. So, can you give an example of a link-layer that does not easily de-couple from the transport? Thanks! -- Al - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
