From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Apr 12 14:52:45 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DBD116A400
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:52:45 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from silby@silby.com)
Received: from relay01.pair.com (relay01.pair.com [209.68.5.15])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B21CE13C459
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:52:44 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from silby@silby.com)
Received: (qmail 89059 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2007 14:52:43 -0000
Received: from 209.68.2.70 (HELO localhost) (209.68.2.70)
	by relay01.pair.com with SMTP; 12 Apr 2007 14:52:43 -0000
X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 09:52:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To: LI Xin <delphij@delphij.net>
In-Reply-To: <461DFB2B.10106@delphij.net>
Message-ID: <20070412095035.N77693@odysseus.silby.com>
References: <461D921E.5040206@delphij.net>
	<20070412005137.A77693@odysseus.silby.com>
	<461DF0A2.5090304@FreeBSD.org> <461DFB2B.10106@delphij.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kern/681110 re-roll of RFC3522 (Eifel detection)
	patchset
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:52:45 -0000


On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, LI Xin wrote:

> That's disappointing, but better safe than sorry.
>
> BTW. Is there any legal alternative, e.g. make this as an option like
> WANT_IDEA?

That sounds like an option... but is it worth it?  Can you give us access 
to your testbench that shows eifel to be an important improvement over the 
current eifel-less stack we have right now?  My guess is that SACK 
nullified most of eifel's importance.

Mike "Silby" Silbersack