| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 11.09.96 10:46l 222 Lines 7041 Bytes #-10890 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_96_186B
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 96/186B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0MWS<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<DB0ACC<PI8DRS<
PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8WFL<PI8VNW
Sent: 960911/0254Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:65242 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA17461 ; Wed, 11 Sep 96 02:13:01 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.61/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00004502 ; Wed, 11 Sep 96 03:17:52 MET
Received: from pa2aga-10 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00004479 ; Wed, 11 Sep 96 00:20:09 MET
Received: from pa2aga-10 by pa2aga-10 (NET/Mac 2.3.61/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00005512 ; Wed, 11 Sep 96 00:20:03 MET
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 96 09:37:14 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_96_186B>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-10
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 96/186B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
rosenaue@mpr.ca (work) | men working for 20 years.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 11:58:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net>
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
On 17:41:04 alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote:
>>> functioning *differenty* than the good old standard internet.
>> Am not really sure how Linux's kernel AX.25 is from ethernet.
>
>Using IP over AX.25 isnt any different to ethernet or slip or anything else.
>AX.25 level sockets are just another socket family and work as you would
>expect.
>
> s=socket(AF_AX25, SOCK_SEQPACKET,0);
>
> struct sockaddr_ax25 blah;
> bind(s,&blah,sizeof(blah));
Yeah, I remembered something about a new address family, AF_AX25.
Doesn't that *prevent* standard applications from routing thru AX25,
applications that use AF_INET as the address family? And isn't
that the purpose of AF_AX25?
Or is the purpose of AF_AX25 to provide a socket connection to another
packet station using *only* AX.25 w/o IP?
I'm not trying to be judgemental here, just trying to understand.
Its important to control what goes over the ethernet and what goes
over RF.
73,
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 12:39:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net>
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
On 04:59:21 alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote:
>>> What I think is really needed as a pair of processes, one for send and
>> one for receive that can block when nothing is going through them and not
>> continually "loop", wasting processor cycles, and that do AX.25 and
>> function as a specialized IP router with features like RSPF.
>
>If you are going to do that kind of work, do yourself and the whole BSD
>community a favour - put your AX.25 and IP over AX.25 in the kernel over
>the BSD socket API. Its not much more work that trying to patch bits
>of wampes and stuff together and it gives you a much nicer final result.
I think there is lots of room for diversity. Just how would one be doing the
BSD community a favor by placing an AX.25 stack in the kernel?
Currenlty I run kernel ppp vs user ppp simply because it was the first one
I figured out how to set up. I might try user ppp (aka "iijppp") one day
because it says it provides on-demand PPP dialup (like I had on my Mac).
I think hooking AX.25 protocols to the kernel's externel interfaces provided
for slip, ppp, and tunnel is also a very good idea. And a good idea to avoid
the pty in between. Meanwhile we certainly aren't loosing performance thru
the pty and it is an elegant hack to make things work with minimal effort.
73,
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 19:53:04 +0100 (BST)
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
> Doesn't that *prevent* standard applications from routing thru AX25,
> applications that use AF_INET as the address family? And isn't
> that the purpose of AF_AX25?
No.
> Or is the purpose of AF_AX25 to provide a socket connection to another
> packet station using *only* AX.25 w/o IP?
Exactly.
> Its important to control what goes over the ethernet and what goes
> over RF.
I tend to add firewall rules for this, otherwise gated likes to try and
talk OSPF over the radio port, and mrouted looks for other nodes etc.
Alan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 19:55:18 +0100 (BST)
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
> I think there is lots of room for diversity. Just how would one be doing the
> BSD community a favor by placing an AX.25 stack in the kernel?
Because your applications are clean, because you can run the same AX.25
applications as Linux (that means your get your ax25 equivalent of inetd,
a node and possibly the FBB BBS without having to write them and without
some poor sod having to spend their life cross porting tools).
> the pty and it is an elegant hack to make things work with minimal effort.
For just routing IP over AX.25 links its fine. To go beyond that its a mess
as you don't have a clean network API for all the other applications to use.
Alan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 19:25:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Durham <durham@durham.UCSD.EDU>
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Alan Cox wrote:
> > functioning *differenty* than the good old standard internet.
> > Am not really sure how Linux's kernel AX.25 is from ethernet.
>
> Using IP over AX.25 isnt any different to ethernet or slip or anything else.
> AX.25 level sockets are just another socket family and work as you would
> expect.
>
> s=socket(AF_AX25, SOCK_SEQPACKET,0);
>
> struct sockaddr_ax25 blah;
> bind(s,&blah,sizeof(blah));
>
> etc.
>
> Alan
>
>
Alan, that sounds good. However, I need connected-mode AX25 for the
BBS. Does Linux do that?
-Jim Durham
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 19:36:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Durham <durham@durham.UCSD.EDU>
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Brian A. Lantz wrote:
>
> The HTTP server was added so that the BBS could be accessed VIA HTTP, and
> because the majority of xNOS users are STILL DOS users. A Unix HTTP
> daemon does them NO good. Many had asked, so I decided to kill two birds
> with one stone, and used it as the method to allow the PBBS to be
> available on the Web.
>
Brian,
I'm doing WEB to PBBS here also. How are you handling call signs,
security and all that? Just curious.
I trap all the input from the web page and look at it before I
send it through to the PBBS.
-Jim Durham
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 10:43:20 +1000 (EST)
From: Carl Makin <cmakin@nla.gov.au>
Subject: Anyone running FreeeBSD?
On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Jim Durham wrote:
> Great. The only thing that may be a problem is that I'm committed
> to keeping an AX.25 BBS running in connected mode, so it would have
So am I. I'm currently running FBB as well as xNOS and FreeBSD. I'd like
to reduce the number of boxes!
> There is X.25 support in FreeBSD already, I believe. That might
> make it easier to implement AX.25.
Perhaps, perhaps not. This sort of thing would probably lend itself to
being made a LKM.
Carl.
--
Carl Makin (VK1KCM) <http://email.nla.gov.au/~cmakin/>
C.Makin@nla.gov.au 'Work +61 6 262 1576' "Speaking for myself only!"
To be continued in digest: tcp_96_186C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
