linux-kernel - Re: ipv4 and ipv6 stacks for new link layers?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200702251421.16863.a1426z@gawab.com>
Date:	Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:21:16 +0300
From:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ipv4 and ipv6 stacks for new link layers?

David Miller wrote:
> From: Markku Savela <msa@...h.iki.fi>
> > I think that is worse than allow a new driver to provide a simple
> > service function which maps IPv4/6 multicast address into link layer
> > address, when asked.
>
> The problem is that this mapping isn't so simple for several
> link layer types.

But this mapping seems to be just a simple de-coupling tool, and any 
de-coupling by definition does/should not change the underlying 
implementation in any way, while allowing for a dynamic rather than a 
fixed/hardcoded relation between the layers.

So, can you give an example of a link-layer that does not easily de-couple 
from the transport?

Thanks!

--
Al

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/