From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Sep 27 23:32:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27ED37B412 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2001 23:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from critter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f8S6WIv69919; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 08:32:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: "Louis A. Mamakos" Cc: Ronald G Minnich , Andrew Gallatin , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: TCP&IP cksum offload on FreeBSD 4.2 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 27 Sep 2001 23:40:54 EDT." <200109280340.f8S3esZ71606@whizzo.transsys.com> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 08:32:18 +0200 Message-ID: <69917.1001658738@critter> From: Poul-Henning Kamp 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 In message <200109280340.f8S3esZ71606@whizzo.transsys.com>, "Louis A. Mamakos" writes: >The paper that someone mentioned earlier in this thread had some >statistics on various classes of errors. In a nutshell, they put >packet sniffers on 4 different networks, and collected traffic. For >each back packet (where the checksum and ethernet CRC differed), they >then looked for retransmissions of the same data, and tried to characterize >the different failure modes they observed. > >It's very interesting reading. Absolutely. We have a pretty big FreeBSD concentration at one of my customers and I was actually considering running their collector (if I can get my hands on it) just to see what the error rate is... -- 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-hackers" in the body of the message