Re: [lwip-members] PPP??

[Paul Sheer]

i still think that writing a ppp implementation from
scratch is completely insane when there is already a
userland ppp implementation for BSD that can be easily
ported to lwip.

would those working on the code please consider
porting this instead?

a full ppp implementation is more complicated even
than a tcp stack. before the code is usable it will
be larger than the whole of lwip

consider for instance that to support pap and chap
you need to import many crypto functions from
openssl. are you going to make those part of lwip
as well?

to support ccp you need the zlib library.
to chat to the modem you need to develop complex
expect/send state machines. then there is lqr and
the complex lcp protocol state machine. the list
goes on and on and on....

slip is a different story - it parallels other
"interfaces" and it is small and light because
its just a framing protocol. do not confuse slip
with ppp - ppp is a monster. bsd userland ppp
was years in the development before it was useful

-paul

On 2003.02.10 17:45 Jani Monoses wrote:
> What do you think Marc's PPP code should live?
> I'd vote for the lwip module instead of contrib (as Marc suggested)
> because it's platform independent and generally useful and should have
> the same "rights" as SLIP and DHCP.
> But this is one large piece of code and deserves it's own dir.
> netif/ppp  maybe?
> 
> Jani.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-members mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-members
>