On 2014/04/02 04:53, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Hi!
Hi Adrian,
On 31 March 2014 19:20, Kevin Lo wrote:
Thank you John. glebius@ suggests we don't need to have two absolutely
equal uma zones since most systems don't run UDP-Lite.
If practice shows that a differentiation at zone level between UD
Hi!
On 31 March 2014 19:20, Kevin Lo wrote:
>
> Thank you John. glebius@ suggests we don't need to have two absolutely
> equal uma zones since most systems don't run UDP-Lite.
> If practice shows that a differentiation at zone level between UDP and
> UDP-Lite PCBs is important, then it could b
On Monday, March 31, 2014 10:20:53 pm Kevin Lo wrote:
> On 2014/03/28 00:21, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:32:16 am Kevin Lo wrote:
> > Are you interested in working on these and report back?
> The revised patch is available at:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~kev
Joe Nosay wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Kevin Lo wrote:
On 2014/03/28 00:21, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:32:16 am Kevin Lo wrote:
Are you interested in working on these and report back?
The revised patch is available at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~kevlo/ud
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Kevin Lo wrote:
> On 2014/03/28 00:21, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:32:16 am Kevin Lo wrote:
>>
>>> Are you interested in working on these and report back?
>>
> The revised patch is available at:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~
On 2014/03/28 00:21, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:32:16 am Kevin Lo wrote:
Are you interested in working on these and report back?
The revised patch is available at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~kevlo/udplite.diff
Thank you for your suggestions.
A few suggestions:
- I wou
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:32:16 am Kevin Lo wrote:
> >>> Are you interested in working on these and report back?
> >> The revised patch is available at:
> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~kevlo/udplite.diff
>
> Thank you for your suggestions.
>
> > A few suggestions:
> >
> > - I would just drop
On 2014/03/26 23:22, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 21, 2014 3:38:19 am Kevin Lo wrote:
On 2014/03/03 04:08, Xin Li wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at
On Friday, March 21, 2014 3:38:19 am Kevin Lo wrote:
> On 2014/03/03 04:08, Xin Li wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA512
> >
> > On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at
On 2014/03/03 04:08, Xin Li wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Xin Li
wrote:
On 02/26/14 18:52, Joe Nosay wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:19 PM
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>>>
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Xi
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Xin Li wrote:
>>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA51
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Xin Li wrote:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA512
>>>
>>> On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Feb 27, 20
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Xin Li wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA512
>>
>> On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Xin Li wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Xin Li
> >> wrote:
> >>
> > On 02/26/14
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 3/2/14, 10:42 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Xin Li
>> wrote:
>>
> On 02/26/14 18:52, Joe Nosay wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Brooks
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Joe Nosay wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Xin Li wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA512
>>
>> On 02/26/14 18:52, Joe Nosay wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Brooks Davis
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Xin Li wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 02/26/14 18:52, Joe Nosay wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Brooks Davis
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:36:29PM -0500, Joe Nosay wrote:
> >>> The last thread on th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/26/14 18:52, Joe Nosay wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Brooks Davis
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:36:29PM -0500, Joe Nosay wrote:
>>> The last thread on this was in 2006. Has it ever been
>>> reconsidered or is the likeli
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:36:29PM -0500, Joe Nosay wrote:
> > The last thread on this was in 2006. Has it ever been reconsidered or is
> > the likelihood of too many damaged packets the reason for not supporting?
> > I'm not sure where to pu
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:36:29PM -0500, Joe Nosay wrote:
> The last thread on this was in 2006. Has it ever been reconsidered or is
> the likelihood of too many damaged packets the reason for not supporting?
> I'm not sure where to put this question. Apologies for the noise.
You've provided next
21 matches
Mail list logo
