scw@renlabs.com wrote:
People can implement proprietary TCP stacks using this "nifty
hook" you've created. So I can't accept these changes.
Is this a religeous argument, or is there a technical or legal issue
lurking here that I'm not aware of? (Linux has all kinds of hooks people
can and do use to implement proprietary things. Is this one different
somehow?)
It seems mostly religious to me, especially since we could export the
generic hook with the GPL export option if we wanted. That is at least
a good 'protection' as is relying on folks to not over-write the bridge
hook, which does not even have the export-GPL restriction. In the past,
Dave has mentioned to me that to over-ride the bridge hook would make the
work a derivative work. I'm not sure a good lawyer couldn't beat that
argument though...
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
