From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Oct  7 14:11:42 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA29040
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA29035
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by root.com (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA20837; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199610072111.OAA20837@root.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: implode.root.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
cc: wollman@freefall.freebsd.org (Garrett Wollman), hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_input.c ip_output.c raw_ip.c 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 07 Oct 1996 20:34:21 BST."
             <199610071934.UAA28629@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 14:11:54 -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>Since people is working on tcp/ip stuff, is there still a reason to
>keep all the "TUBA" stuff in our sources ?

   In my opinion it should be removed. The only reason one might keep it would
be as sort of "reference" for implementing large IP addresses (TUBA = "TCP/UDP
with Big Addresses"), but the TUBA proposal is clearly not what the Internet
is going to in the future. I think the code is dead weight and only serves
to make the 'real' code more difficult to follow and maintain.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project