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  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:	Sun, 19 Jun 2016 14:15:10 -0600
From:	Hajime Tazaki <thehajime@...il.com>
To:	tom@...bertland.com
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] tou: Transports over UDP - part I


On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:52:55 -0700,
Tom Herbert wrote:
> 
> > We also now have to debug against every single userland TCP
> > implementation someone can come up with, the barrier to entry is
> > insanely low with TOU.  Maybe this sounds great to you, but to me
> > it is quite terrifying
> >
> No, it doesn't sound great, but the major problem we have is that
> Android and to some extent iOS & Windows take a long time to update
> the kernel, and it can take an _extremely_ long time if we need them
> to actively enable features that are needed by applications. For
> instance, TFO was put in the Linux several years ago, but it still
> hasn't been enabled in Android and only fairly recently enabled in
> iOS. 

This is exactly the identical motivation what LibOS (now
joined to LKL) has - to have network stack personality.
Without having additional *layers* in the protocol header,
an application can freely benefit any protocol extensions
without updating their host kernel.

the performance is far lower than TOU at this stage (we also
have netperf benchmark results) but I'm positive to improve
this.

So, I would say why not LKL ?

* LKL
https://lwn.net/Articles/662953/

-- Hajime

Powered by blists - more mailing lists