From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Mouw Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] in-kernel sockets API Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:29:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20060614142903.GI11542@harddisk-recovery.com> References: <1150156562.19929.32.camel@w-sridhar2.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060613140716.6af45bec@localhost.localdomain> <20060613052215.B27858@openss7.org> <448F2A49.5020809@google.com> <20060614133022.GU11863@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Daniel Phillips , bidulock@openss7.org, Stephen Hemminger , Sridhar Samudrala , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from dtp.xs4all.nl ([80.126.206.180]:19563 "HELO abra2.bitwizard.nl") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964961AbWFNO3G (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:29:06 -0400 To: Harald Welte Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060614133022.GU11863@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 03:30:22PM +0200, Harald Welte wrote: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:12:41PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > This has the makings of a nice stable internal kernel api. Why do we want > > to provide this nice stable internal api to proprietary modules? > > because there is IMHO legally nothing we can do about it anyway. Use of > an industry-standard API that is provided in multiple operating system > is one of the clearest idnication of some program _not_ being a > derivative work. IMHO there is no industry-standard API for in-kernel use of sockets. There is however one for user space. Erik (IANAL, etc) -- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands