XOT

XOT

[Ian Cass]

Hi,

I'm using  xotd 0.04 by Stephane Fillod with a degree of success, but it
seems a horrible hack. I wonder if this is the best (only?) xotd available.

--
Ian Cass

Re: XOT

[John Hughes]

> I'm using  xotd 0.04 by Stephane Fillod with a degree of success, but
> it seems a horrible hack. I wonder if this is the best (only?) xotd
> available.

I've not had time to look at the code; what's so hacky about it?

Re: XOT

[Ian Cass]

> I've not had time to look at the code; what's so hacky about it?

It's a userland driver using a ethertap like device. That sort of thing
should really be integrated into the kernel. However, it does work, although
not 100% reliably for me at the moment.

--
Ian Cass

Re: XOT

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 06:41:04PM +0100, Ian Cass escreveu:
> > I've not had time to look at the code; what's so hacky about it?
> 
> It's a userland driver using a ethertap like device. That sort of thing
> should really be integrated into the kernel. However, it does work, although
> not 100% reliably for me at the moment.

I've been thinking about working on this for a long time, as I have written
a driver for a serial sync card that has a X.25 stack in firmware and by
means of the wanrouter subsystem allows tcp to be carried over X.25, having
infra-structure to make one protocol work on top of other on a easy way is
something interesting to have, but I haven't looked at xotd, if I had perhaps
I'd be of the opinion that the current infrastructure could be easily used
to have a X.25 over TCP in the kernel.

- Arnaldo

RE : XOT

[John Hughes]

Ian Cass writes:

> John Hughes wrote: 
>>'ve not had time to look at the code; what's so hacky about it?

>It's a userland driver using a ethertap like device. That sort of
>thing should really be integrated into the kernel. However, it
>does work, although not 100% reliably for me at the moment.

Ah, you mean it's very existence is a hack :-)

Any idea how you write a Linux driver that uses another Linux
driver for it's I/O?

Re: RE : XOT

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 09:21:43AM +0200, John Hughes escreveu:
> Ian Cass writes:
> 
> > John Hughes wrote: 
> >>'ve not had time to look at the code; what's so hacky about it?
> 
> >It's a userland driver using a ethertap like device. That sort of
> >thing should really be integrated into the kernel. However, it
> >does work, although not 100% reliably for me at the moment.
> 
> Ah, you mean it's very existence is a hack :-)
> 
> Any idea how you write a Linux driver that uses another Linux
> driver for it's I/O?

Look at ncpfs, smbfs, TUX, khttpd, IPX and Appletalk working on top of SNAP
that works on top of LLC, etc.

- Arnaldo

Re: XOT

[Ian Cass]

It'll just stop accepting inbound X25 connections & stop allowing outgoing
connections to be initiated. A restart of xotd & all x25 daemons cures this.
It'll show this behaviour every 10-12hrs.

--
Ian Cass

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hughes" <John@Calva.COM>
To: "'Ian Cass'" <ian.cass@mblox.com>
Cc: <linux-x25@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:27 AM
Subject: RE : XOT


> Ian sez:
> > ... However, it [xot] does work, although not 100% reliably
> > for me at the moment.
>
> What's unreliable for you?
>
> I'm having a little problem making Linux xotd work with my
> home grown implementation, but I think I've tracked it down
> to a difference of opinion about when the TCP call should be
> cleared.
>
> (rfc1613 says:
>
>
>    The TCP connection MUST be created before the virtual circuit
>    can be established.  The TCP connection MAY be maintained after
>    the virtual circuit has been cleared.
>
> Great, it MAY be maintained, but when should it be cleared?  Can
> it be cleared by either end, or only by the caller?)
>
>
>