Hi,
Seems that instead of clearing the confusion I was confused myself.
What we are talking about here is the protocol ID carried in the
ethernet header, which ethernet uses to identify the network layer (as
defined in the file ).
So its indeed IEEE to address for this, and not IANA.
Thanks f
Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
FLAME stands for "Forwarding Layer for Meshing"
FLAME provides an intermediate layer between the network
layer (e.g. IPv4/IPv6) and the link (MAC) layer,
providing L2.5 meshing. Both network layer and MAC layer
What is wrong with meshing on L3?
(It is cal
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
Didn't you just reinvent 802.1d bridging? and/or WDS?
Hi Stephen,
Yes, more or less, but with a twist.
802.1D does not allow retransmitting over the same interface (which is
what basically happens in mesh networks), and WDS uses static
configuration of neighbou
An attempt to clear up the confusion that seems to have occurred:
FLAME is an intermediate layer between existing MAC and network (IP) layers.
From MAC layer point of view FLAME is another network layer protocol
(besides IP, IPX etc.), so the FLAME protocol ID we are taking about is
a network la
On Thu, 2006-25-05 at 12:53 +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
>
> I agree with your analysis, and recently I read an interesting interview
> with her (I think it was linked from slashdot, an interview with the
> "mother of the Internet ;-) I'm not sure her work (I don't exactly
> recall the specifi
jamal wrote:
Essentially you are extending the broadcast domain i.e a bridge within
on top of a bridge. I would question the scalability of such a beast
in the presence of many nodes. Also take a look at some of the work
Radia Perlman (who invented bridging really) is up to these days.
Hi J
Hi Pavel
(I've removed linux-kernel from CC, this is only network related and
added Herman to the CC, since he's not subscribed)
Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
FLAME stands for "Forwarding Layer for Meshing"
FLAME provides an intermediate layer between the network
layer (e.g. IPv4/IPv6) and the
Hi!
> FLAME stands for "Forwarding Layer for Meshing"
>
> FLAME provides an intermediate layer between the network
> layer (e.g. IPv4/IPv6) and the link (MAC) layer,
> providing L2.5 meshing. Both network layer and MAC layer
What is wrong with meshing on L3?
(It is called flame so lets at le
On Tue, 2006-23-05 at 19:43 +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 May 2006 16:07:47 +0200
> > Herman Elfrink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> FLAME stands for "Forwarding Layer for Meshing"
> >>
> >
> > Didn't you just reinvent 802.1d bridging? and/or WD
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006 16:07:47 +0200
Herman Elfrink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FLAME stands for "Forwarding Layer for Meshing"
Didn't you just reinvent 802.1d bridging? and/or WDS?
I wouldn't say "reinvent", but the difference is small but significant.
FLAME could
On Tue, 23 May 2006 16:07:47 +0200
Herman Elfrink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> FLAME stands for "Forwarding Layer for Meshing"
>
> FLAME provides an intermediate layer between the network layer (e.g.
> IPv4/IPv6) and the link (MAC) layer, providing L2.5 meshing. Both
> network layer and MAC
On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:51 +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
> > Use of /proc for an API is no longer desirable. Please rewrite.
> > -
>
> hmm, ok, I'm not sure this will happen anytime soon (being a rather low
> priority thing, which is also the reason it's not submitted as patch to
> the kernel an
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 16:51 +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
> > Use of /proc for an API is no longer desirable. Please rewrite.
> > -
>
> hmm, ok, I'm not sure this will happen anytime soon (being a rather low
> priority thing, which is also the reason it's not submitted as patch to
> the kernel a
On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:55 +0200, Erik Mouw wrote:
> > >Ethernet protocol number I assume you mean. If so this at least used to
> > >be handled by the IEEE, along with ethernet mac address ranges.
> > >
> >
> > Yes ethernet protocol (it's below IP level), I didn't realise that IEEE
> > also hand
Erik Mouw wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:41:48PM +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
Alan Cox wrote:
On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:07 +0200, Herman Elfrink wrote:
FLAME uses an unofficial protocol number (0x4040), any tips on how to
get an official IANA number would be highly appreciated.
Ethernet p
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:41:48PM +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:07 +0200, Herman Elfrink wrote:
> >>FLAME uses an unofficial protocol number (0x4040), any tips on how to
> >>get an official IANA number would be highly appreciated.
> >>
> >
> >Ethernet
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
O
Usage
=
- Load module:
modprobe flame [debuglevel=] [flm_topo_timer=]
: debug level, default: 1
: topology check timer (in seconds), default: 5
- Open/close a device with:
echo "up []" > /proc/net/flame/cmd
echo "down " > /proc/net/flame/
Alan Cox wrote:
On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:07 +0200, Herman Elfrink wrote:
FLAME uses an unofficial protocol number (0x4040), any tips on how to
get an official IANA number would be highly appreciated.
Ethernet protocol number I assume you mean. If so this at least used to
be handled by the IE
O
> Usage
> =
> - Load module:
> modprobe flame [debuglevel=] [flm_topo_timer=]
> : debug level, default: 1
> : topology check timer (in seconds), default: 5
> - Open/close a device with:
> echo "up []" > /proc/net/flame/cmd
> echo "down " > /proc/net/flame/cmd
>
On Maw, 2006-05-23 at 16:07 +0200, Herman Elfrink wrote:
> FLAME uses an unofficial protocol number (0x4040), any tips on how to
> get an official IANA number would be highly appreciated.
>
Ethernet protocol number I assume you mean. If so this at least used to
be handled by the IEEE, along with
be a semicolon-separated list of 6 hex-pairs
- Get current forwarding info from FLAME:
cat /proc/net/flame/fwd
- Get nodes/cost information from MACINFO:
cat /proc/net/macinfo
Bugs
Should you find any bugs (and preferably fix them ;-) please let us know via
the mailinglist.
subject: [ANNOU
21 matches
Mail list logo
