Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:37:42 -0800 (PST) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: hackers@freebsd.org Cc: dillon@apollo.backplane.com Subject: Re: Can TCP changes be put in RELENG_4? Message-ID: <200112060437.fB64bgT89342@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <200112052142.fB5LgVM53167@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20011205085750.I28101-100000@coredump.scriptkiddie.org> <200112052142.fB5LgVM53167@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <200112052142.fB5LgVM53167@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> wrote: > These changes are performance fixes, not security fixes. I consider > them fairly significant performance fixes, but these bugs have been in > the TCP stack for literally a whole year without an outcry so I don't > see much justification for putting them into the security branch. > > -Matt Yep, I agree 100%. The purpose of the security branch was spelled out clearly from day one. People who want something else can move to -stable. John -- John Polstra John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200112060437.fB64bgT89342>