From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 23 13:24:12 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B8316A4CE; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:24:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from stewart.chicago.il.us (dpc674425142.direcpc.com [67.44.25.142]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A73843D69; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:24:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from randall@stewart.chicago.il.us) Received: from stewart.chicago.il.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i9NDO3tr031523; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:24:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from randall@stewart.chicago.il.us) Message-ID: <417A5B28.9080308@stewart.chicago.il.us> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:22:48 -0400 From: Randall Stewart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040429 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mallman@icir.org References: <20041021183238.00E8977A9D0@guns.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <20041021183238.00E8977A9D0@guns.icir.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: Andre Oppermann cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:24:12 -0000 Mark Allman wrote: >>Sure. To make you sleep better it will be disabled by default (like >>T/TCP) and possibly even not compliled in by default (#ifdef'd). > > > Part of your argument against T/TCP. :-) > > >>A writeup will follow once I get there. I made this request before I >>start working on it to prevent to waste my time on it if people wanted >>to religiously stick to T/TCP. > > > I think moving on from T/TCP is fine, don't get me wrong. And, I am all > for seeing new schemes that buy us some of the things T/TCP was designed > for. I am just not enthusiastic about dumping things into the kernel > without some review and thought (by more than one person; and, that is > not a knock on you --- if I had a nickel for every half-baked thing I'd > implemented somewhere .... basically, it's good to get different > perspectives). > > Doing this in a systematic way may have benefits beyond FreeBSD, as > well, of course. I would rather have Andre work with me to get any other rinkles out of SCTP that he deems are there... and get the KAME-SCTP stack ported directly in to FreeBSD.. this IMO ... would make more sense... Get something that is pretty well baked (IMO at least) and work to get it "productionized" (even though I don't feel it needs much work in this vein)... R > > allman > > > -- Randall Stewart 803-345-0369 815-342-5222(cell)