[openbeosnetteam] Re: Status
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:52:48 +0200 CEST
Oliver Tappe <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2006-06-14 at 12:29:45 [+0200], Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > Since we all seem to like that code so much, maybe we should step
> > away
> > from the idea of porting the FreeBSD stack? We could still use it
> > as a
> > coding reference (ie. what has to be done and how should it work
> > etc.).
> > With you, Andrew, and me, and maybe someone else like Marcus
> > jumping
> > in, we've quite a bit engineering power at our hands to implement a
> > clean stack based on FreeBSD and what we have (and other sources,
> > as
> > well, if preferred).
> Well, it *is* very tempting to have a go at doing a stack of our own,
> especially since there all of a sudden are several developers who
> want to
> start working on the netstack. Furthermore, it should prove very
> helpful
> that there's at least three different sources to look at (and copy
> functionality from): FreeBSD, our current stack and Marrow (don't
> know
> about all you other guys, but I intend to check that one out, too).
Well, David can only have done better than with our stack, although I
wouldn't assume he has improved that much.
> So are we going to have some kind of official decision about this
> then? New
> stack or port?
>
> I think I'd vote for the new stack, it will be more work, but not
> that much
> more, considering how the FreeBSD code looks. Of course it would be a
> pain
> to integrate (leave alone) implement IPsec, but I don't know if
> that'll be
> necessary anyway.
I'd vote for a new one as well. The only official decision we can make
is when we all agree on doing this, right? :-)
Bye,
Axel.
Other related posts:
