From owner-freebsd-net Fri Nov 30 13:22:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [216.33.66.196]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6608637B417 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 13:22:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 0478281D04; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 15:22:29 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 15:22:28 -0600 From: Alfred Perlstein To: "George V. Neville-Neil" Cc: Jonathan Lemon , Jordan Hubbard , Alex Rousskov , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: funding TCP stack rewrite Message-ID: <20011130152228.M46769@elvis.mu.org> References: <200111302114.NAA3026638@meer.meer.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200111302114.NAA3026638@meer.meer.net>; from gnn@neville-neil.com on Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 01:14:51PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * George V. Neville-Neil [011130 15:15] wrote: > > I don't think a rewrite is ever going to be much of a good idea, > > a restructuring might, meaning that fixing up all the layering > > and making it more flat like Van Jacobson suggested (and Linux > > implemented in one of their stack of the year projects) might > > gain us performance. > > I would disagree, and I'll say why in a second. You're allowed to disagree, it's just not as productive as actually dictating design. If you were to prosose how this rewrite should/would be done, not just the goals then people would pick various pieces and do them, but just stating goals without the means to achieve those goals isn't very productive. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message