From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Sep 30 23:35:09 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA22066
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:35:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oskar.nanoteq.co.za (oskar.nanoteq.co.za [163.195.220.170])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22048
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from rbezuide@localhost)
	by oskar.nanoteq.co.za (8.8.7/8.8.5) id IAA00705;
	Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:33:36 +0200 (SAT)
From: Reinier Bezuidenhout <rbezuide@oskar.nanoteq.co.za>
Message-Id: <199710010633.IAA00705@oskar.nanoteq.co.za>
Subject: Re: FreeBSD TCP stack SUX big juicy ones.
In-Reply-To: <m0xGD5O-0024w4C@a42.deep-thought.org> from Richard Jones at "Oct 1, 97 10:56:17 am"
To: richard@a42.deep-thought.org (Richard Jones)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:33:36 +0200 (SAT)
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Greetings good and humble user ...

> was not technical enough for the hackers@freebsd.org list and got lost
> amongst techno-gems such as "Our *NIX is better than their *NIX" and
> "The number of the beast is vi vi vi".  Now as important as these issues are I 
It would not amaze me if you didn't get any answer with this e-mail ...

So .. sorry .. I don't have a technical answer for you,
explaining what happens, but maybe it's the attitude of you
TCP/IP stack that's the problem :)

But like I know the guys at FreeBSD ... they probably won't
get offended by this and reply anyway :)

Bye
Reinier