On Fri 12 Feb 2016 at 10:17:31 -0800, John Nemeth wrote: > tap(4) is a direct interface between userland and the network. > vether(4) would not be (although you could use BPF, etc.). It > would be an ethernet device that represents the host. If you know > how to configure Cisco devices, think BVI. As someone who tinkers with virtual machine emulators (PDP-10, PDP-11 etc) I like tap(4) very much, because it really makes it easy to make the VM communicate over ethernet with the outside world. Some other OSes also have a tap device. It would be REALLY inconvenient if suddenly NetBSD would change methods, and need not only NetBSD-dependent code but also NetBSD-version-dependent code. -Olaf. -- ___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert -- The Doctor: No, 'eureka' is Greek for \X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl -- 'this bath is too hot.'
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature