From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 19 02:12:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B499216A407 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 02:12:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com (out4.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DFF143C9F for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 02:12:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C481D550B8; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:52:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by out1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:52:55 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: M2lqgRzFnrHj+cNpfxMBH9bMnzos6AgN7Awnf+634zBf 1166493175 Received: from [192.168.123.18] (82-35-112-254.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EEF72360C; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:52:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <458745F8.4090707@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 01:52:56 +0000 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060825) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dave jones References: <5628d8010612160452y5c562757h8ef8ed0776c5525d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5628d8010612160452y5c562757h8ef8ed0776c5525d@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UDP lite for FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 02:12:27 -0000 dave jones wrote: > Hi, > > Is anyone working on implementing UDP lite in FreeBSD? If not, > I'd like to work on it. Nope. I just skimmed the RFC and it sounds like a bit of a hack, though I am sure it can be done cleanly in the source tree without unnecessary code duplication or interference at the user-kernel boundary. I look forward to seeing patches for this. It would be interesting to see if hardware checksum offloading can be taught to do it, cleanly, though I imagine that is something much further down the line. Regards, BMS