[cgl_discussion] Buffer overflow

[Adriano Galano]

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
space?

> 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 ;-)

Regards,

-Adriano

> --MiKu
>
>