Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 20:09:19 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: steve@visint.co.uk (Stephen Roome) Subject: Re: ISDN drivers/cards Message-ID: <19970809200918.DJ10039@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970809170805.2939A-100000@server.arg.sj.co.uk>; from Andrew Gordon on Aug 9, 1997 17:35:56 %2B0100 References: <199708052316.BAA01266@wall.jhs.no_domain> <Pine.BSF.3.91.970809170805.2939A-100000@server.arg.sj.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Andrew Gordon wrote: > Again, the base BISDN is quite sound, but the PPP patches are just a > quick hack - as acknowledged by those involved in producing them. > Given that BISDN is being re-written, there is little motivation > to do further work on PPP for the old version. There is some motivation. Note that i've already implemented a diff- erent version of PPP for BISDN (using the /sys/net/if_sppp* stuff from Serge Vakulenko), but in the end it turns out both implementations have their pros and cons. My version is more targeted to people who wish to have semi-permanent connections with as little overhead as possible, i.e. i can ifconfig my various bppp devices, and get semi- permanent routing out to my various ISDN PPP peers. The pppd-based version is better suited for a typical ISDN dialin server, with many possible peers connecting. Martin promised to cleanup his (arguably hacky) code once he is convinced that his PPP solution will survive. My own PPP variant works fairly stable as well. A number of things are still missing however (PAP/CHAP are still undebugged and not working), that's why i haven't ever publically announced it so far. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970809200918.DJ10039>