On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:

I would request two things:

1) the extra couple of months; this will not prevent the evitable removal
  yet only defer it.

Sounds good to me -- my goal is not to remove NETNATM, rather, the remove code that doesn't compile or work. I'm happy to sit on this for a while and see if things improve; fixing the former is great, fixing the latter would be even better :-).

(I wonder if Harti is in a situation to test any of this still?)

Robert


2) If anyone of you is using (or want to be able to (continue to) use) NATM
  or can test things, I re-enabled it with most of the code in HEAD and
  the patch is available for 8,x as well but need to work with somoene
  to make sure it'll really work.  I am willing to spend more time on it
  if you send me an email.

Best Regards,
Bjoern

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Author: bz
Date: Wed Dec 15 22:58:45 2010
New Revision: 216466
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/216466

Log:
 Bring back (most of) NATM to avoid further bitrot after r186119.
 Keep three lines disabled which I am unsure if they had been used at all.
 This will allow us to seek testers and possibly bring it all back.

If you have the ability to test (on 8.x or HEAD) or are using NATM,
please get in contact with me.



 Discussed with:      rwatson
 MFC after:   7 weeks

Modified:
 head/sys/conf/NOTES
 head/sys/netinet/if_atm.c
------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Bjoern A. Zeeb                              Welcome a new stage of life.
       <ks> Going to jail sucks -- <bz> All my daemons like it!
 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/jails.html

_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to