Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 16:43:52 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: utsl@quic.net, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sendfile() in tftpd? Message-ID: <3CC5F1B8.45A17EA4@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204231521120.24266-100000@scribble.fsn.hu> <3CC59C44.13013A1E@mindspring.com> <15557.40442.852602.681416@caddis.yogotech.com> <20020423182839.GA22074@quic.net> <15557.43312.713502.540548@caddis.yogotech.com> <20020423195947.GA22950@quic.net> <15557.48900.773726.309492@caddis.yogotech.com> <20020423204622.GA23933@quic.net> <15557.51972.914307.703315@caddis.yogotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams wrote: > > That's what everyone else said, and why that stupid protocol still > > exists. > > No, it exists because it's good enough to do the job. It's not optimal, > but it's good enough. Optimal for all situations means re-inventing TCP > over and over again, which is non-optimal from an engineering point of > view, IMO. "Good is the enemy of better." "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." "Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't." 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3CC5F1B8.45A17EA4>