Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:06:53 +0000 (GMT) From: Richard Wendland <richard@starburst.demon.co.uk> To: andre@freebsd.org (Andre Oppermann) Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TTCP/RFC1644 problem Message-ID: <200402101406.OAA02096@starburst.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4028B68F.41DB11FD@freebsd.org> from "Andre Oppermann" at Feb 10, 2004 11:46:39 AM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> My changes > (tcp hostcache) are in 5.2 for the first time. Before it it's the > legacy code as well. I hope I haven't broken TTCP more than it was > before. > > > and solaris(but i guess they don't do ttcp) and linux (not yet). > > Linux never will. They consider TTCP broken by design. Solaris > I dont know. I'm pretty sure FreeBSD is the only general-purpose OS whose TCP stack implements T/TCP. > Removing it would make maintainance of the tcp code a bit easier. If T/TCP isn't being tested in the release cycle, and it causes problems eg for hostcache, that seems to me a good reason to remove or disable it (remove net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 sysctl), despite the emotional attachment to T/TCP. We don't really want novices playing with it if the code might have become broken. RFC1644 is after all a 1994 "Experimental Protocol" that hasn't gained acceptance. The only reason I can see for keeping the code now would be as a basis for experimenting with a similar new protocol - and I'm not aware of anyone looking at that. Richard -- Richard Wendland richard@wendland.org.uk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200402101406.OAA02096>