Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:32:37 -0400 From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <20041021183238.00E8977A9D0@guns.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <4177F875.2822A51E@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain > Sure. To make you sleep better it will be disabled by default (like > T/TCP) and possibly even not compliled in by default (#ifdef'd). Part of your argument against T/TCP. :-) > A writeup will follow once I get there. I made this request before I > start working on it to prevent to waste my time on it if people wanted > to religiously stick to T/TCP. I think moving on from T/TCP is fine, don't get me wrong. And, I am all for seeing new schemes that buy us some of the things T/TCP was designed for. I am just not enthusiastic about dumping things into the kernel without some review and thought (by more than one person; and, that is not a knock on you --- if I had a nickel for every half-baked thing I'd implemented somewhere .... basically, it's good to get different perspectives). Doing this in a systematic way may have benefits beyond FreeBSD, as well, of course. allman --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBeADFWyrrWs4yIs4RAuRpAJ97dKby5KS6sJKaDupU8s4OU7/1rQCfURgQ qF+ji12qxOfWn09/Xu92sxg= =MK6u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041021183238.00E8977A9D0>