Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:58:58 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: mallman@icir.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <417806F2.50607@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <4177F875.2822A51E@freebsd.org> References: <20041021173145.1AE6477A9D0@guns.icir.org> <4177F875.2822A51E@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andre Oppermann wrote: >Mark Allman wrote: > > >>>Thus after the removal of T/TCP for the reasons above I want to provide >>>a work-alike replacement for T/TCP's functionality: >>> >>> >>I haven't fully digested this yet. But, I'll voice my distaste for >>implementing things that just seem to "Make Sense". That's a model that >>has been used and is used by other operating systems and those of us who >>watch packets can attest that things that "Make Sense" often don't and >>likely would have benefitted by a bit more thought and a bit more >>vetting. I would be happier if something like this were vetted out a >>bit more (written up, digested by folks, etc.) before it went into >>anything but someone's experimental kernel. Just my two cents. >> >> > >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). If >enabled and compiled in it does not automatically enable itself for all >and everything. The application has to enable it on the socket as well. > >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. > > couldn't you do it with a spoofing interface? i.e. tcp sessions going through get turned into something that loks like ttcp on the wire and converted back at teh other end?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?417806F2.50607>