On 2/19/08, Mayuresh Kathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > something as good as FireEngine,
I'm following this thread with quite some amusement, but one thing is not in the least clear to me: why do you think you want "something as good as FireEngine". Heck, even under the assumption FireEngine is Really Good (TM), you should compare it to the *new* stack of FreeBSD, whose marketing blurb has at least a bit more meaty than Sun's. http://www.meetbsd.org/storage/kris.kennaway_meetbsd2007.pdf SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or would you like ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh? You can't decide? You have not even shown a corner case, much less in general why it would be desirable to completely throw away the current architecture. I use OpenBSD since 3.0 on very small CPUs and also on rather big ones (all i386 and amd64, though), and I don't remember a single case in which network stack performance wouldn't at least have met my expectations. What performance difference are you expecting? Do you know the implications, which the different approaches impose on the kernel architecture? Even if there would be a developer, who would in principle be open to the idea, you have to show her that it is worth the hassle. But you don't even know what you're talking about. If *I* were a developer, I would be offended by the notion that AnotherSolution is *that* *much* *better* (as you imply) _without_ showing any evidence. --knitti
