netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] tou: Transports over UDP

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:	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