From owner-freebsd-bugs Thu Feb 8 17:40:22 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD7337B401 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:40:03 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f191e3L52740; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:40:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:40:03 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200102090140.f191e3L52740@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Tony Finch Subject: Re: kern/24959: proper TCP_NOPUSH/TCP_CORK compatibility Reply-To: Tony Finch Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR kern/24959; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Tony Finch To: Garrett Wollman Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, Tony Finch Subject: Re: kern/24959: proper TCP_NOPUSH/TCP_CORK compatibility Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 01:35:01 +0000 Garrett Wollman wrote: >< said: > >> * TCP_NOPUSH has additional T/TCP-related semantics that may be >> undesirable in an application that only wants the TCP_CORK >> semantics. If the option is set on a listening socket then it >> enables TAO. > >I don't believe this is material, since Transaction TCP is disabled by >default. I still think it's a bad idea to mix the two features together like this: applications should be able to get predictably non-T/TCP behaviour if they so choose. How about keeping the TCP_NOPUSH part of the functionality under that name and making a TCP_ALLOWTAO option for the listen-side functionality? Tony. -- f.a.n.finch fanf@covalent.net dot@dotat.at DOGGER FISHER GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER THAMES: NORTHERLY 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 AT FIRST IN GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER AND THAMES, BECOMING VARIABLE 3. WINTRY SHOWERS. GOOD. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message