From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Feb 17 20:10:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from frmug.org (frmug-gw.frmug.org [193.56.58.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513B437B962 for ; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 20:10:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by frmug.org (8.9.3/frmug-2.5/nospam) with UUCP id FAA18663 for chat@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 05:09:59 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) Received: by keltia.freenix.fr (Postfix, from userid 101) id 65B878865; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 00:53:42 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 00:53:42 +0100 From: Ollivier Robert To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD vs Linux comments Message-ID: <20000218005342.A88144@keltia.freenix.fr> Mail-Followup-To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20000217182741.20025.qmail@nwcst267.netaddress.usa.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from blk@skynet.be on Thu, Feb 17, 2000 at 09:31:37PM +0100 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT/ELF AMD-K6/200 & 2x PPro/200 SMP Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org According to Brad Knowles: > %s/NFS/NFR/ I remember Markus Ranum's comments on the Linux network stack two years ago in USENIX (it was before 2.2)... 2.2 has probably got better but they still use the dreaded "SOCK_PACKET" thingy (as opposed to BPF) and that alone make them bad candidate for something like NFR. -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 4.0-CURRENT #77: Thu Dec 30 12:49:51 CET 1999 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message