Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 15:38:04 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> Cc: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: My planned work on networking stack Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0403081536090.51038-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20040308214020.73C245D07@ptavv.es.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:22:55 -0800 > > From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 12:22:10PM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 10:24:31AM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, SACK is often looked upon as a waste of effort to those > > > > who use nets in more commercial forms where aggregation of lots of small > > > > streams is how fat pipes are used. Research big science are about the > > > > only ones who have a real need for this kind of performance and it's > > > > growing fast. Without SACK, FreeBSD will be a non-starter for these > > > > purposes. > > > > > > I've got a co-worker who is part of a research group at ISI that > > > is doing research on long fat pipes with large streams. They are > > > intrested in doing a SACK implementation. I hope to have some more > > > information later this week. > > > > > > > Has anyone looked at Luigi's stuff? > > > > http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/sack.html > > > > The page states that Luigi had SACK available in FreeBSD 2.1R, > > which was released 8 years ago. > > I am aware of at least 3 implementations of SACK for FreeBSD over the > years, none of which ever made it into the system. At least one of the > people who submitted a patch (his was for 2.2) also provided some > significant enhancements to one of the GigE drivers that was done with > DOE funding to support the LBNL developed BRO IDS, but which were > globally beneficial. > > In both cases, the patches were ignored by those with commit bits and > the person who did the work says that he will no longer bother to submit > his work to FreeBSD. I was not using FreeBSD at the time that this > happened, so I don't know what, if any, objections were raised to the > GigE patches, but I have since seen SACK disparaged by others as a waste > of time that is not really needed. Obviously they have no interest in > >Gbps streams where we have an interest in >20Gbps streams. I believe that sme of the patches were considerred "experimental and just lacked someone to make them production quality. In other cases they were not against 'current' and porting them to -curren twas left as "an exercise for the reader". No-one who had that ime had a need for them. > > I'm not trying to stat a flame war here, but it is frustrating and this > initiative for a major network code overhaul makes me hope that > something will actually happen. It's just that FreeBSD's network stack > was once the best around and it's simply not today. Andre's proposal > could go a LONG way toward fixing this and I am eagerly looking forward > to if! > -- > R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer > Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) > Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) > E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0403081536090.51038-100000>