In the last episode (Jul 12), Leo Bicknell said:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 05:55:39PM +0100, Paul Robinson wrote:
> > When I asked about SACK about 18 months ago (IIRC), the general
> > consensus was that it was a pile of crap, and that FBSD SHOULDN'T
> > implement it if possible. I however, agree that there are a lot of
> > things in SACK that would massively benefit FBSD's net performance.
Considering that w2k and Linux both have sack enabled by default, it's
not going away. Do you have a link to the thread that says sack
doesn't help?
> Does anyone know if Luigi's patches at
> http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/sack.html ever got wider use than his
> own testing? It looks like it was written some time ago, and if
> people have been running it since then there might be some real world
> data.
It was for 2.1.6, but I had patches to make it work on 2.2.* and 3.0,
but then the TCP stack changed enough that I couldn't keep it working.
I didn't have any problems with it in the couple of years I had it on
my system.
There was a post in June on the -net mailinglist from a guy that is
working on getting SACK into -STABLE, so there's hope yet.
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
