Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:33:45 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org> To: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> Cc: =?iso-8859-1?B?vEK+SsLX?= <cfliu@realtek.com.tw>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Does 4.4 FreeBSD kernel supports TCP simultaneous open? Message-ID: <20011129093345.A22194@iguana.aciri.org> In-Reply-To: <20011129112750.S75389@prism.flugsvamp.com> References: <200111290637.fAT6bd213755@prism.flugsvamp.com> <001701c178a3$e43670e0$a22314ac@RTCN3848> <20011129100534.Q75389@prism.flugsvamp.com> <20011129083005.C19821@iguana.aciri.org> <20011129112750.S75389@prism.flugsvamp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 11:27:50AM -0600, Jonathan Lemon wrote: > > All the various #ifdefs scattererd over the code are absolutely sick; > they fairly scream out for a sensible rewrite. However, from my point > of view, if I'm going to rewrite things, there should be functional > improvements as well, not just rearranging what we have in a different > fashion. I don't feel quite ready for this... yet. functional can be also interpreted as "easier to read and validate" which seems to be one of the main drawbacks of the current code. I'd even be willing to pay the price of a small regression in functionality, on the grounds that it is better to know that "X is not implemented" than "X, Y, Z are implemented but we have no idea if they work in all cases, and no way to test". As a matter of fact, that would be an improvement, not a regression. cheers luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011129093345.A22194>