On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 11:11:39PM -0500, Jeff McAdams wrote: > Yeah...no more pty's...that'll be nice. *thinking through it* You may > still end up dealing with pty's...I'm hardly an expert on it, but I > think pppd is gonna insist on having a char device to use...even if no > actual frames pass over it. I think you've already alluded to that > being a problem. Aah, but that's where the PPPoX sockets come in (in theory). They provide a way to hook into PPP without ptys. This is for example how PPPoE works without using ptys. That's why I've making this pppox plugin for PPP whose sole purpose in life is to make pppd accept the socket as a valid connection point. > >If we can fix this data_ready() hook issue, I think it's going to be as > >efficient as you can make it. I'm still tossing up whether to handle HELO's > >in kernel space but I think it'd be a good test to see if the userspace > >daemon is still alive. End-to-end testing and all that. > > > Yeah, that should be nice. I'd definitely pass the Hello's up to the > user-space, would suck to have the kernel module keep the tunnels alive > when they really should be dropped. Agreed. The only other issue is the single copy that happens when a packet moves from the session socket to the UDP socket. You could probably get around this by hooking straight into the UDP code in the kernel but I'm reluctant to start relying on internal interfaces of core networking code. Incoming traffic doesn't suffer from this problem (only the data_ready() hook problem). But it's close, I can feel it :) -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > "All that is needed for the forces of evil to triumph is for enough good > men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke > "The penalty good people pay for not being interested in politics is to be > governed by people worse than themselves." - Plato
Attachment:
pgp00124.pgp
Description: PGP signature
