Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:41:45 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Andrew Gordon <arg-bsd@arg1.demon.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC1974 (STAC) Message-ID: <3508.1004114505@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:30:53 BST." <20011026145515.X37247-100000@server.arg.sj.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20011026145515.X37247-100000@server.arg.sj.co.uk>, Andrew Gordon wr ites: >It's rather a narrow loophole though! Well, a loophole is a loophole... >> >It is also not clear that it offers much advantage in typical use, since >> >.... >> >> STAC makes a good dent in the tcp headers and stuff... > >Even after they've been VJ-compressed? VJ compression is very loss-sensitive and therefore not desirable. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3508.1004114505>