[cgl_discussion] Buffer overflow

Adriano Galano adriano at satec.es
Wed Apr 16 08:32:50 PDT 2003

Hi again:

> On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 08:04, Adriano Galano wrote:
> (...)
> > Is not better to CGL become strong for IA-64/x86-64 architectures?
> Well, we have kept CGL quite HW agnostic (there are couple borderline
> cases, though), but this question has cropped up couple times (i.e.
> what is CGL doing about IA-64/x86-64), and the answer so far has
> really been "nothing, because we need not to".

Some applications like Softswitch or Core routing could be bring too much
performance using one 64bits architecture. Some Softswitch builders are
porting the apps to IA-64 arch.

> CGL builds on top of Linux kernel,

what's mean "on top"? Is not neccesary to apply changes at the kernel level

> which at it's own seems to be doing
> fine enough job tracking those two architectures. And there
> have been no
> feature proposals in CGL that would require use of 64-bit
> architecture.

Itanium architecture have extensions that amplify the Monitoring and
Management Layer proposed at CGL.

I would like to have Linux NEBS servers on Itanium ;-)



> --MiKu

More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list