Olivier Péningault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> le ven 25-10-2002 à 10:25, Niels Möller a écrit :
> > Sure, but do you really want them to run fully separately? It's common
> > (although not required by any standard, afaik), that an ipv6 socket
> > bound to the ipv6 wildcard interface should be a
le ven 25-10-2002 à 11:16, Stephan Trebels a écrit :
> BTW: the Plan9 approach to this separation is pretty similar:
> [...]
I didn't know it, it is an interessant way of implementing things.
> Personally I'd make one translator responsible for the ANY-IP
> translation for a physical or virtual d
le ven 25-10-2002 à 10:25, Niels Möller a écrit :
> Sure, but do you really want them to run fully separately? It's common
> (although not required by any standard, afaik), that an ipv6 socket
> bound to the ipv6 wildcard interface should be able to accept ipv4
> connections.
In my opinion, we can
BTW: the Plan9 approach to this separation is pretty similar:
There is a kernel namespace that provides ethernet functionality
(typically at /net/ether*), but a separate one that provides
IP,UDP,TCP on top of ethernet. Those were put into one,
as ICMP was needed for all and t reduce code overhea
Olivier Péningault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> le jeu 24-10-2002 à 21:49, Niels Möller a écrit :
> ipv4 and ipv6 can run separatly.
Sure, but do you really want them to run fully separately? It's common
(although not required by any standard, afaik), that an ipv6 socket
bound to the ipv6 wildca
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:08:30AM +0200, Olivier Péningault wrote:
> le jeu 24-10-2002 à 21:49, Niels Möller a écrit :
>> I.e. when I call socket(), connect() to create a tcp connection, I
>> call some function in -lsocket
> I see what you mean. For the layer 3+ translators, at first I thought
>
le jeu 24-10-2002 à 21:49, Niels Möller a écrit :
> You need one piece of code that links between glibc and your ip
> interfaces, and that also performs packetforwarding, source and
> destination address selection, and such stuff. That code should be
> installed as the translator for /servers/socke
le jeu 24-10-2002 à 09:59, Niels Möller a écrit :
> My advice is that you start by designing and implementing some kind of
> ethernetdevice (kernelspace or part kernel, part userspace translator)
> that can support running several pfinets in parallell. Perhaps it
> should look like the bsd tunnel d
Olivier Péningault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - A translator per physical device, wich will present the upper side of
> a layer 2 protocol (ex: ethernet protocol over an ethernet card, ppp
> over a serial port, ...)
I think this is the right way, no matter how the servers above this
are design
