[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1294051199.2892.198.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:39:59 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>
Cc: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, shemminger@...tta.com,
daniel.baluta@...il.com, jochen@...hen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] new UDPCP Communication Protocol
Le lundi 03 janvier 2011 à 10:54 +0100, Stefani Seibold a écrit :
> How can you do a routing, how can you determinate the MTU of the route.
> This are basics. Look into other code how this things will be handled is
> in my opinion the right way, since there a no function provide to do
> this.
>
Hmm, how user land can perform this task then ?
Is there an open source implementation of UDPCP ?
What are its problems ? You say its dog slow, I really wonder why.
UDP stack is pretty scalable these days, yet some improvements are
possible.
Why not adding generic helpers if you believe you miss some
infrastructure ? This could benefit to other 'stacks' as well.
> Otherwise you can say the same about all the filesystem or PCI
> drvivers , which do also a lot in the same way. But since this is the
> way to do it, it is the right way.
>
These drivers are here because of high performance on top of high
performance specs.
While UDPCP is only a layer above UDP. If the problem comes from UDP
being too slow, it'll be slow too.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists