netdev - Re: [PATCH] tcp: Socket option to set congestion window

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 27 May 2010 00:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hagen@...u.net
Cc:	andi@...stfloor.org, therbert@...gle.com, shemminger@...tta.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ycheng@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Socket option to set congestion window

From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 09:08:27 +0200

> And by the way, the IETF (and our) paradigm is still to shift functionality to
> end hosts - not into network core. "The Rise of the stupid network" [1] is
> still a paradigm that is superior to the alternative where vendors put their
> proprietary algorithms into the network and change the behavior in a
> uncontrollable fashion.

Superior or not, it's simply never going to happen.  We are far beyond
being able to get to where we were before NAT'ing and shaping devices
started to get inserted everywhere on the network.

And I also don't see any of this stuff as fundamentally proprietary.

People want deep packet inspection, people want to control their user's
traffic.  And people, most importantly, are willing to pay for this.

Therefore, these elements will always be in the network.

Better to co-exist with them and use them to our advantage instead of
fantasizing about a utopia where they don't exist.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html