From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Sep 16 16:21:45 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA19553
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA19547;
          Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:21:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA18099; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199609162321.QAA18099@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: Jeffrey Barber <jab@rock.anchorage.net>
cc: "'freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org'" <freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org>,
        "'hackers@FreeBSD.ORG'" <hackers@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: Slow Etherlink 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:00:41 -0800."
             <01BBA3DF.D5124740@jabpc.rtfm.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:21:05 -0700
From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>From The Desk Of Jeffrey Barber :
> OK, If we can get past all the sarcasim bull shit! I realize that the =
> ping I showed for Linux seems to be slower than FreeBSD but the point is =

Try not to post bull shit posts. If indeed the FreeBSD box is slower
than the Linux box I would start by posting the actual measurements which
show the results indicating your assumptions.

Also, state the configuration of both the Linux box and the FreeBSD box.

	Amancio