From owner-freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Thu Apr 27 18:06:07 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AF94D53546; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:06:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (spindle.one-eyed-alien.net [199.48.129.229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D131E6D; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:06:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: by spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (Postfix, from userid 3001) id 7C97E5A9F14; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:00:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:00:29 +0000 From: Brooks Davis To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Subject: The fate of ngatm Message-ID: <20170427180029.GB35387@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5vNYLRcllDrimb99" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) X-BeenThere: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: ATM for FreeBSD! List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:06:07 -0000 --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-- From owner-freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Fri Apr 28 12:13:33 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B92D54A97; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:13:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AF2F1F76; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:13:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1d44m4-000Nky-0g; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 15:13:24 +0300 Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 15:13:23 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Brooks Davis Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The fate of ngatm Message-ID: <20170428121323.GF83631@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20170427180029.GB35387@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170427180029.GB35387@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: ATM for FreeBSD! List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:13:33 -0000 On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 06:00:29PM +0000, Brooks Davis wrote: > 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. may be it can be used together w/ USB ADSL modem? Not sure about suported and existeing modern ADSL USB modem. From owner-freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Sat Apr 29 16:48:11 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2DCD56302; Sat, 29 Apr 2017 16:48:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE0ADE43; Sat, 29 Apr 2017 16:48:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from Julian-MBP3.local (124-148-214-220.dyn.iinet.net.au [124.148.214.220]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v3TGlv38060352 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 29 Apr 2017 09:48:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: The fate of ngatm To: Brooks Davis , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-atm@freebsd.org References: <20170427180029.GB35387@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <752628c6-f6a2-c4e4-e756-66b115428766@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 00:47:51 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170427180029.GB35387@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: ATM for FreeBSD! List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 16:48:11 -0000 On 28/4/17 2:00 am, Brooks Davis wrote: > 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 I don't know if people are using these now, but at one stage people were using them to decode/encode atm higher level protocols over an ethernet transport to implement a PPPoA infrastructure. No idea if it's still being used .