Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 13:07:24 -0500 From: Karim Fodil-Lemelin <kfl@xiphos.ca> To: mallman@icir.org Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <418A6FDC.5010204@xiphos.ca> In-Reply-To: <20041022182430.31A2B1EF3BF@lawyers.icir.org> References: <20041022182430.31A2B1EF3BF@lawyers.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
I am jumping in here, was too busy to read the list for the last 2
weeks, so please excuse my intrusion. We are using T/TCP in our product
line and are very happy with the performance gain. Could you tell me
what is the rational for removing T/TCP (security/performances/code
complexity, etc ..) from FreeBSD?
Again, sorry for being a bit off topic here.
Mark Allman wrote:
>>A T/TCP alternative as you are describing sounds very
>>similar to PR-SCTP (Partial Reliability SCTP). (Don't let the
>>name fool you, please read the internet draft).
>>
>>
>
>Can you sketch this in a bit more detail? I do not follow. PR-SCTP is
>about being allowed to "abandon" data --- i.e., send it and then decide
>that you don't really care if it gets across the network (say, because
>it got lost and has taken too long to retransmit and so the data is out
>of date). Without a Big Hack, I cannot envision TCP doing something
>like this. What am I missing?
>
>Thanks,
>allman
>
>
>--
>Mark Allman -- ICIR -- http://www.icir.org/mallman/
>
>
>
>
>
--
Karim Fodil-Lemelin
Lead Programmer
Xiphos Technologies Inc.
www.xiplink.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?418A6FDC.5010204>