Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 16:02:49 +1100 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: dennis@etinc.com, nate@sri.MT.net Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, nate@rocky.sri.MT.net Subject: Re: pppd vs ijppp Message-ID: <199601110502.QAA24844@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> And lastly, I think if you took a show of hands on providers and users >> after asking them if they would mind using even 50k to get better >> performance i think that I'd be surprised to see even 1 hand not >> waving wildly in the air. >Give them the whole picture. >'You can have this really cool package which integrates everything you >want and is *really* easy to setup. However, it uses about 5% (*) of your >CPU. OR, you could have this other version which uses about 1% of your >CPU, but it's alot harder to setup and doesn't have as many features.' >Or, we could all of those features in the kernel, increase your memory >use by a couple 100K (always, even if you don't use it), and it would >take us 6 months to get it working. :)' (*) Fine print. Per connection. Perhaps less than 5%. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199601110502.QAA24844>