Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Bruce Simpson
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 - 2:11 pm

Ed Schouten wrote:

    For what it's worth, rfcomm_sppd exists largely because up until 
now, mobile phone vendors have not implemented the BNEP profile in their 
hardware.

    Having to initiate a PPP session across a virtual serial port... to 
get to a PPP session over UMTS/GPRS... is just silly. It's not possible 
to roam even locally across a Bluetooth piconet to other providers with 
this sort of setup, as may be possible with BNEP in some situations.
    Also, if for whatever reason the local Bluetooth RFCOMM session is 
interrupted (phone rebooted, or interference in the ISM 2.4GHz band), 
due to the stateful nature of PPP, the connection can get torn down.
    BNEP doesn't have this issue, because it presents an Ethernet-like 
layer, and is therefore stateless, apart from address configuration.

    However, having said that, most folks will still be using mobile 
handsets which don't support BNEP for the foreseeable future. 
Unfortunately this means rfcomm_sppd still needs to play nice with 
userland ppp. Of course for the typical use case, as I undestand it, 
rfcomm_pppd is going to be invoking rfcomm_sppd as a wrapper, so pipes 
are just fine (and in fact probably already being used).

    Maksim seems to be talking about the use case where folk are 
actually doing straight serial over RFCOMM and need to tie it down to a 
known tty, though.
    Surely there must be a way to tie rfcomm_sppd down to a specific pts 
number, or failing that, teach it to report the pts which it got allocated?

cheers,
BMS


_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed, Krassimir Slavchev, (Tue Feb 17, 2:50 am)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed, Maksim Yevmenkin, (Tue Feb 17, 10:50 am)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed, Maksim Yevmenkin, (Tue Feb 17, 11:03 am)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed, Maksim Yevmenkin, (Tue Feb 17, 12:07 pm)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed, Maksim Yevmenkin, (Tue Feb 17, 12:51 pm)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, rem ..., Poul-Henning Kamp, (Tue Feb 17, 12:55 pm)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, rem ..., Poul-Henning Kamp, (Tue Feb 17, 2:19 pm)
Re: HEADS UP: IFF_NEEDSGIANT consumers to be disabled, removed, Bruce Simpson, (Wed Feb 18, 2:11 pm)