From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Dec 5 20:51:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97D337B416; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:51:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-209.245.132.144.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([209.245.132.144] helo=mindspring.com) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16BqVI-00011J-00; Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:51:25 -0800 Message-ID: <3C0EF953.54CF24DB@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:51:31 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Lamont Granquist , Mike Barcroft , Jim Durham , Jordan Hubbard , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Can TCP changes be put in RELENG_4? References: <20011205085750.I28101-100000@coredump.scriptkiddie.org> <200112052142.fB5LgVM53167@apollo.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matthew Dillon wrote: > > These changes are performance fixes, not security fixes. I consider > them fairly significant performance fixes, but these bugs have been in > the TCP stack for literally a whole year without an outcry so I don't > see much justification for putting them into the security branch. I think the main question is whether or not Linux should continue to kick FreeBSD's ass after 4.5 is released. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message