Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 27 Sep 2002 21:38:39 +0300
From:      "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi>
To:        "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>
Cc:        <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: SO_TIMESTAMP
Message-ID:  <0a2301c26655$22c4eea0$8c2a40c1@PHE>
References:  <09ce01c26630$ba177cc0$8c2a40c1@PHE> <200209271743.g8RHhbu6011907@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Is there a reason why SO_TIMESTAMP does not work with TCP sockets
> > but only with RAW and UDP ?
>
> Because it doesn't really make sense?

But it would. It would let me know how long it took the process to get to the
data
I´m currently reading from the socket. (and notify operator to buy more hardware
if it took too long)
>
> Since the TCP stream may be arbitrarily re-ordered, knowing when a
> packet arrived is not particularly useful to an application.  If you
> really care, you should probably use BPF instead.
>
Are you suggesting to reimplement TCP sockets in userland?

Pete



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0a2301c26655$22c4eea0$8c2a40c1>