Peter Memishian wrote:
> I'd like to have folks review the work at
> http://cr.grommit.com/~gdamore/dmfe_gldv3/webrev
>
> * This will make dmfe a DLPI style 1 provider as well. (A good
> thing, IMO, DLPI style 2 is a "bug".)
Yes. FWIW, all the Clearview /dev/net nodes are DLPI style-1 *only*.
Since those will be what applications interact with in the future,
we're on our way to getting rid of "style-2 disease".
> * I'd love to replace the dmfe-custom loopback ioctls with standards
> sys/netlb.h ioctls. However, I'm not sure if any consumers are going to
> be impacted.
IIRC, switching to sys/netlb.h would allow SunVTS coverage.
Yes, I believe that is true. What I'm not sure of, is whether there is
a custom SunVTS module in place for dmfe. (It wouldn't surprise to
learn that there is.) Is SunVTS open sourced? :-)
When last I looked at SunVTS source (back in 2001 or 2002) the loopback
ioctls were specific to each driver, and they were special cased in SunVTS.
Btw, I am looking for _formal_ review feedback... i.e. for folks that I
can cite in an RTI request. :-)
-- Garrett
--
meem
_______________________________________________
crossbow-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/crossbow-discuss
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
