Re: New version of ngATM

On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Vincent Jardin wrote:

:> ARR>How would people compare the current ngATM and current HARP stacks?  Is
:> it ARR>worth at all to fully port the HARP driver code to the ngATM code
:> and just ARR>waste the netatm/ code?
:>
:> When I catch up with my clip code, then ngATM can everything that HARP
:> can (except for SPANs signalling. Does anybody actually still use that?).
:> Plus it has UNI4.0 instead of 3.1, it has LAN emulation and it should be
:> trivial to support PPPoA, PPPoEoA or what ever crazy combination one could
:> think of.
:
:I already use the HARP stack for PPPoE and PPPoEoA whithout any modification 
:of the HARP source code ;-)
:
:> With regard to drivers: I'm going to busdmaify the en driver. I think I
:> have an LE155 card somewher here, so I will tackle the IDT driver after
:> that. When this is done, we have all that is supported with HARP also in
:> ngATM.
:
:The LE155 board uses the IDT77211 SAR chipset, doesn't it ? Then it is 
:already supported by the HARP stack, moreover this driver uses DMA. It 
:already supports UBR and CBR.
:
:According to me, the HARP stack is a very stable code, it has lot of features 
:and their drivers are working very well for a long time. If we need to 
:improve the ATM support of FreeBSD, one should be more focused on the current 
:code in order to improve the HARP stack and to add some new drivers.
:
:However, if there are some issues with the HARP stack, then ngATM is a very 
:good alternative. Nevertheless, I do not see any issues with HARP yet ;-) It 
:just lacks of people in order to support it.
:
:FreeBSD has already 2 ATM stacks : a basic one (NATM) and a full featured one 
:(HARP), why is a third ATM stack required ?
:

Anyone actually use netnatm from Cranor?  So far I see people stepping up
for HARP and ngATM, so just curious to hear from those netnatm folks.

Cheers,
Andrew

--
Andrew R. Reiter
[email protected]
[email protected]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message