[riot-devel] NSTF - Naming the stack
hauke.petersen at fu-berlin.de
Mon May 4 16:05:54 CEST 2015
giving the ng_stack a name sounds like a very good idea to me (and as
far as I remembered I already mentioned this last summer...). Though
finding a name is tough and I don't like the obvious once (flexnet_,
default_, riotnet_, etc...).
Also 'cutting' out the re-usable parts as headers, header parsing,
checksum calculation and some others might make sense, though with this
I think we have to keep in mind, that not every network stack
implementation has to use those 'generic' building blocks, as these
implementations might have their own requirements to certain function
When it comes to protocol header files, as 'net/udp.h', I would be even
more careful. I don't think we will have a generic udp header, that each
network stack will comply to. In my opinion, each network stack should
just define it's own header files, as these will differ depending on
their internal implementation...
The only important thing is, that we will have a clearly defined
interface for applications (e.g. RIOT sockets, CoAP or whatever).
So I would say: let's find a name?!
On 04.05.2015 10:22, Kaspar Schleiser wrote:
> On 05/03/15 14:52, Martine Lenders wrote:
>>> Perfect. Still, what do we refer to when talking about "this new tack"?
>>> "the default stack"?
> The problem here is that the interfaces someone uses will imply the
> For example, if someone includes "net/udp.h", after dropping the "ng_"
> prefix, you get the "default stack" udp include file.
> IMHO that file should include a stack agnostic interface whose
> implementation is selected by e.g., USEMODULE.
> Same for all other developer-accessible protocols.
> I'm happy with having a default network stack. I'm not happy if that
> stack's specific interface ends up as de-facto standard interface,
> making switching stacks practically impossible.
> devel mailing list
> devel at riot-os.org
More information about the devel