From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 18:08:26 -0700 From: "Christopher Nielsen" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] linux il/ip In-Reply-To: <1055b16f0609260653i60fb764al9743bed22a0dfec3@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060926081235.GA18116@shodan.homeunix.net> <3b0429061aabc0eb9907215e207b27a4@quanstro.net> <1055b16f0609260653i60fb764al9743bed22a0dfec3@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: c2464f3c-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 the problem is firewalls and nat do care, and they are everywhere. back when i was purchasing large volumes of cisco equipment each year for an employer, i tried to get cisco to add IL support to IOS. no dice. apparently, we weren't purchasing enough. i agree with russ and jmk. IL is long dead. there are plenty of other projects that would be a better use of your time. On 9/26/06, Artem Letko wrote: > On 9/26/06, erik quanstrom wrote: > > i don't think it would be very hard -- or very useful. > > since many routers dislike any data that's not udp/tcp > > > > that's not true - ip routers don't care about layers 4 and up most of the time > > > if you'd like to extend il, i think that il/ethernet > > would be a better way to go. > > > > - erik > > -art > > -- Christopher Nielsen "They who can give up essential liberty for temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin