From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon May 3 8:30:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from sumatra.americantv.com (sumatra.americantv.com [207.170.17.37]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0524014D5E for ; Mon, 3 May 1999 08:30:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jlemon@americantv.com) Received: from right.PCS (right.PCS [148.105.10.31]) by sumatra.americantv.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA24090; Mon, 3 May 1999 10:30:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from free.pcs (free.PCS [148.105.10.51]) by right.PCS (8.6.13/8.6.4) with ESMTP id KAA28291; Mon, 3 May 1999 10:30:14 -0500 Received: (from jlemon@localhost) by free.pcs (8.8.6/8.8.5) id KAA09442; Mon, 3 May 1999 10:30:14 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 10:30:14 -0500 (CDT) From: Jonathan Lemon Message-Id: <199905031530.KAA09442@free.pcs> To: dg@root.com, advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new picture of wcarchive X-Newsgroups: local.mail.freebsd-advocacy In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Architecture and Operating System Fanatics Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In article you write: > IOlite, while interesting in principle, was nothing more than a proof of >concept and unfortunately isn't something that we would want to include in >FreeBSD. I spoke with the researcher at length about it. For this particular Could you elaborate a little about that? We just had Vijay over here to give a talk about it, and while interesting, it seemed a little limited. In particular, the immutable buffers would seem to preclude building data up in pieces for transmission, and they "cop'ed out" by still using normal mbufs for small data transfers. -- Jonathan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message