Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- From: Josef Moellers <josef.moellers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:58:39 +0100
chrb81@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi Phil,
Don't modify either. Create a new library that implements it all.
Make it open source GPL, LGPL, BSD, or MIT licensed. If it becomes
something worth integrating into GLIBC, they will steal your code
or re-implement it themselves.
It was more of an academical question anyway.
The main point I was trying to get an answer to was: Which would
really be the best place to put something like this?
Obviously, as this is related to the network stack, it must belong to
the OS core and not be just implemented within an user space library.
TCP/UDP/... are in the kernel, aren't they? So the transport layer
mechanism itself is also part of the kernel, or not?
But telnet/(t)ftp/[rs]sh are implemented in user land.
ISO/OSI Layer 5 is the Session Layer, not the Transport Layer!
Only put into the kernel what must absolutely belong into the kernel! I see no reason why the Session Layer should be implemented in kernel space.
--
These are my personal views and not those of Fujitsu Siemens Computers!
Josef Möllers (Pinguinpfleger bei FSC)
If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize
-- T. Pratchett
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- From: chrb81
- Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- References:
- Adding a new OSI layer
- From: chrb81
- Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- From: phil-news-nospam
- Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- From: chrb81
- Adding a new OSI layer
- Prev by Date: Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- Next by Date: Re: help with huge memory consumption??
- Previous by thread: Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- Next by thread: Re: Adding a new OSI layer
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|