Hi,
Seems that instead of clearing the confusion I was confused myself.
What we are talking about here is the protocol ID carried in the
ethernet header, which ethernet uses to identify the network layer (as
defined in the file <linux/if_ether.h>).
So its indeed IEEE to address for this, and not IANA.
Thanks for your help on this issue.
Herman.
Herman Elfrink wrote:
An attempt to clear up the confusion that seems to have occurred:
FLAME is an intermediate layer between existing MAC and network (IP)
layers.
From MAC layer point of view FLAME is another network layer protocol
(besides IP, IPX etc.), so the FLAME protocol ID we are taking about
is a network layer (IANA) protocol number.
From IP point of view FLAME behaves like a 'normal' ethernet-type MAC
layer; no need for new IEEE protocol number.
Regards,
Herman Elfrink.
Alan Cox wrote:
On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:55 +0200, Erik Mouw wrote:
Ethernet protocol number I assume you mean. If so this at least
used to
be handled by the IEEE, along with ethernet mac address ranges.
Yes ethernet protocol (it's below IP level), I didn't realise that
IEEE also handled the portnumbers. I'll check the ieee website to
see how it works, tnx!
IEEE doesn't handle port numbers. Port numbers are for whatever is
layered on top of ethernet, so you need to register those with the
appropriate authorities (IANA for IP).
No no no
There are several sets of numbers here
Each ethernet DIX frame has a "protocol" (its the bits used for length
in 802.*). IEEE at least used to handle the assignment of those. On top
of that you have IP, IPX, etc with their own numbering agency.
As he said "ethernet protocol (it's below IP level)", those are the
protocol numbering bodies he wants, or to whomever it was delegated.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
