Also sprach Paul Mackerras
>Jeff Mcadams writes:
>> Indeed. And let me just throw out another thought. A clean
>> abstraction of the various portions of the PPP functionality is
>> beneficial in other ways. My personal pet project being to add L2TP
>> support to the kernel eventually. A good
Also sprach Paul Mackerras
Jeff Mcadams writes:
Indeed. And let me just throw out another thought. A clean
abstraction of the various portions of the PPP functionality is
beneficial in other ways. My personal pet project being to add L2TP
support to the kernel eventually. A good
Jeff Mcadams writes:
> Indeed. And let me just throw out another thought. A clean abstraction
> of the various portions of the PPP functionality is beneficial in other
> ways. My personal pet project being to add L2TP support to the kernel
> eventually. A good abstraction of the framing
From: "Alan Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I had hoped for 2.4 to use generic ppp with it. That might be the more
> productive way to attack the problem.
Generic PPP requires the user mode pppd to handle
the LCP and NCPs, while syncppp implements these in
the kernel.
Instead of using ifconfig to
Jeff Mcadams writes:
Indeed. And let me just throw out another thought. A clean abstraction
of the various portions of the PPP functionality is beneficial in other
ways. My personal pet project being to add L2TP support to the kernel
eventually. A good abstraction of the framing
From: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had hoped for 2.4 to use generic ppp with it. That might be the more
productive way to attack the problem.
Generic PPP requires the user mode pppd to handle
the LCP and NCPs, while syncppp implements these in
the kernel.
Instead of using ifconfig to bring an
6 matches
Mail list logo
