Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:00:29 +0000 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Subject: The fate of ngatm Message-ID: <20170427180029.GB35387@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--5vNYLRcllDrimb99 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline As previous threatened, I've removed support for NATM (as well as a remarkable number of remnants of the old ATM framework). One piece that still remains is the ngatm framework in netgraph. This includes the ng_ccatm(4), ng_sscfu(4), ng_sscop(4), and ng_uni(4) nodes. These don't attach to physical interfaces and didn't depend on the NATM interface code so I left them alone in the first cut. My question is, are they useful without physical interfaces? If so, keeping them doesn't appear to have a high support burden. If not, we should remove them. -- Brooks --5vNYLRcllDrimb99 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZAjG8AAoJEKzQXbSebgfAx08H/jXMPxEqHqlBvr2LAfkIq7wf 8H6zkiCxcv6F0J+bwfkJwDmWEJ+/D36nGAFdul2MfxRfVP8121QrYVp3HrkXpaIr Eje8SVPMhB5QXmHZoqsozRkdPLAiKjM0qv9W4Y7gnfb4fn5JRt1/VeCPNGKgcoKi pnM6HvkzC/d2xaIF6BXDmNpJW8g4Zk1+TDDFJDqKtYagm7G4CQRajRtyt1jbj2ub blmBo9NbHZTVn1yDC1LO08Jdpjx+tPaIq4xp+E6+1J6rCT780YIiQRsjD11gdvtS jBet1jNzrO1vIPp3sL9OWMwtHTQCgr40HmYasI1DxhC8YBl5v+RxZ0tCQWovcz0= =DdUp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5vNYLRcllDrimb99--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170427180029.GB35387>