From owner-freebsd-bugs  Thu Feb  8 18:20:22 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 B8CF337B4EC
	for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>; Thu,  8 Feb 2001 18:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f192K3I58238;
	Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:20:03 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from gnats)
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <200102090220.f192K3I58238@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Cc: 
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: kern/24959: proper TCP_NOPUSH/TCP_CORK compatibility
Reply-To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
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: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: kern/24959: proper TCP_NOPUSH/TCP_CORK compatibility
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 21:13:11 -0500 (EST)

 <<On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 01:35:01 +0000, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> said:
 
 > 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.
 
 I'm still puzzled as to what difference you think this makes to an
 application.
 
 -GAWollman
 
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message