Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:58:58 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: mallman@icir.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <417806F2.50607@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <4177F875.2822A51E@freebsd.org> References: <20041021173145.1AE6477A9D0@guns.icir.org> <4177F875.2822A51E@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Andre Oppermann wrote: >Mark Allman wrote: > > >>>Thus after the removal of T/TCP for the reasons above I want to provide >>>a work-alike replacement for T/TCP's functionality: >>> >>> >>I haven't fully digested this yet. But, I'll voice my distaste for >>implementing things that just seem to "Make Sense". That's a model that >>has been used and is used by other operating systems and those of us who >>watch packets can attest that things that "Make Sense" often don't and >>likely would have benefitted by a bit more thought and a bit more >>vetting. I would be happier if something like this were vetted out a >>bit more (written up, digested by folks, etc.) before it went into >>anything but someone's experimental kernel. Just my two cents. >> >> > >Sure. To make you sleep better it will be disabled by default (like >T/TCP) and possibly even not compliled in by default (#ifdef'd). If >enabled and compiled in it does not automatically enable itself for all >and everything. The application has to enable it on the socket as well. > >A writeup will follow once I get there. I made this request before I >start working on it to prevent to waste my time on it if people wanted >to religiously stick to T/TCP. > > couldn't you do it with a spoofing interface? i.e. tcp sessions going through get turned into something that loks like ttcp on the wire and converted back at teh other end?home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?417806F2.50607>