Darren Reed writes: > If the general purpose mechanism isn't general > purpose enough then it behooves us to document > what its failings are and try to improve it. > Additionally, we should make a better attempt to > use existing interfaces and improve them as required > (especially when the idea is to promote them for > external use) rather than baking new, private, ones > every time we have a slightly different programming > task.
As we tried to point out during the review of netinfo/pfhooks, we've had a large number of "generic packet event frameworks" come through the ARC, including Fireengine and IPQoS. Each has said that there was some flaw with the previous one, that the previous one couldn't be extended to do what was needed, and that thus either a new one would be built, or some project would bypass the hooks and just link directly into IP. This just follows that tradition. It's certainly true that we could update netinfo. It's also true that the ILB project team made some good points about why they can't use it. But at a higher level, the problem we have is that we have "framework" projects that (for whatever reason) promise more than they seem to deliver, likely because there are fundamental issues (such as conflicts among hooks and performance) that haven't been resolved. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
