Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 02:10:08 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>, "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM>, Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: TCP&IP cksum offload on FreeBSD 4.2 Message-ID: <3BB43E70.C198F4BB@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109270728220.26552-100000@snaresland.acl.lanl.gov> <200109271416.f8REGaZ64624@whizzo.transsys.com> <15283.14648.430630.163513@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200109271631.f8RGVCZ65964@whizzo.transsys.com> <15283.23007.137091.883110@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200109271717.f8RHHBZ66485@whizzo.transsys.com> <20010928000651.C6178@dan.emsphone.com> <3BB4088E.7B65FDB5@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > > Something to do would be to enable hardware checksumming on 1/2 your > > machines, and compare the bad packet counts at reported by netstat on > > the unchanged machines for (say) a 1-month period before and after the > > change. That should tell you whether you're gaining or losing > > reliability. It'll be really easy for me, as my current (software > > cksum) stats show no errors at all: > > the trouble is that if you are trying to find errors between RAM and WIRE > then the checksums will be correct regardless of whether there is an error.. > so the counts you are checking would be no use.. > you need to know what the correct packet contents should be.. I have a bad idea! I have a bad idea! (timeout for the "bad idea" dance...) Let's checksum all our RAM, so we can know when it corrupts data, too! ...at some point, you are going to have to trust your hardware. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BB43E70.C198F4BB>