Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:36:52 -0600 From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> To: mark tinguely <tinguely@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> Cc: jlemon@flugsvamp.com, rizzo@aciri.org, cfliu@realtek.com.tw, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Does 4.4 FreeBSD kernel supports TCP simultaneous open? Message-ID: <20011130103652.Z75389@prism.flugsvamp.com> In-Reply-To: <200111301501.fAUF1L146802@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> References: <20011129083005.C19821@iguana.aciri.org> <200111301501.fAUF1L146802@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 09:01:21AM -0600, mark tinguely wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 10:05:34AM -0600, Jonathan Lemon wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 03:03:04PM +0800, ¼B¾JÂ× wrote: > > > Thanks...I know where my problem is now...It's indeed a duplicate SYN. > > > > > > By the way, the tcp_input function is so long and large and there are > > > several goto statements which make reading the code even more difficult. Is > > > this intened to be like this? Even with Steven's TCP/IP Vol.2, it took me > > > three whole days to draw a Visio flow chart of this function. Has anybody > > > ever considered of reorganizing this module? > > > > I don't believe so; the code was originally designned to avoid function > > calls, and is essentially a couple of large switch statements. The flow > > pretty much mirrors the original RFC, and shouldn't be too hard to follow. > > want to make the process harder by adding Early Congestion Notification, > Duplicate Selective Acknologment, Rate Halfing congestion control? Of > course add [Adaptive] Random Early Detection in the input queues. Heck > if we are asking for a heculian effort, I might as well pile up the > requests. Haha. I already scheduled work for ECN at one point, but that got put on hold. Yes, I'm aware of all of these things, and am quite willing to restructure the stack for them. But these are large tasks, and there are only so many things I can work on. Funded work, or work of direct relevance to me, usually takes priority. > Eventually these features will be needed to keep the TCP stack competitive. > The Pittsburgh Supercompter Center's Rate-Halfing, SAK (not DSAK), ECN > code looks even more complex (with all the ifdefs, etc) than the FreeBSD > code, and I did not remeber seeing the changes for IPv6. > > Too bad there are not companies throwing money around to fund a good > rewrite...of course there is some competative advatange to do so only > for themselves. Anyone want to fund a network hacker to do all of these? Seriously? :-( -- Jonathan 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?20011130103652.Z75389>