Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Harti Brandt <hartmut.brandt@dlr.de>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: netatm: plan for removal unless an active maintainer is found
Message-ID:  <20060329123238.B87509@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de>
In-Reply-To: <20060329100513.D19236@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <20060315004530.B5861@fledge.watson.org> <20060329100513.D19236@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Robert Watson wrote:

RW>On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
RW>
RW>> In order to begin to merge revised socket/pcb code, required to fix a
RW>> number of current races manifesting in the TCP code under load, and
RW>> required for breaking out the tcbinfo lock which is a significant
RW>> bottleneck in high performance TCP and multi-processor TCP scalability, I
RW>> will disconnect netatm and dependent components from the build on April 1,
RW>> 2006.  At that point, I will merge updated socket and pcb reference
RW>> counting.
RW>
RW>Reminder: April 1 approaches.
RW>
RW>I've merged changes to many non-netinet protocols in support of the
RW>approaching socket/pcb reference model changes, but have the netinet changes
RW>depend on completing socket layer changes that are believed not to work with
RW>netatm as they stand.  I'll be posting the socket and netinet changes to
RW>arch@ today; I've posted them previously to other lists, such as current@.

Skip Ford expressed interest in netatm, but he said also that he would 
continue to work on HARP even when it is removed. So I guess it could be 
revived in the future (just in the case). I've also sent him my half -IDT 
driver and he said he will first work on this. When this is ready we have 
all the hardware supported in ngATM which HARP also does.

harti



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060329123238.B87509>