On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 09:52:18AM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> or kevent(), or aio_suspend(). Thus, I still do believe that the judicious
> use of the aio_*() functions with signaling could support a dramatically
> different programming style, especially for complex network clients and/or
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
>> >I believe if you want to build a more maintainable, more adaptable,
>> >more modularized program then you should avoid two things - the threads and
>> >the signals. If you like to use a callback beha
Stephane Raimbault wrote:
I'm currently using a freebsd box running natd to forward port 80 to
several (5) web servers on private IP's.
OK.
I have discovered that natd doesn't handle many requests/second all that
well (seem to choke at about 200 req/second (educated guess))
Let's take that number
dunno if i am the randy you meant to invoke, but sctp is far
more usable and used than t/tcp. but it is not widely used
yet. it very well may be. i think it would be good to
support it, and i have zero qualms about dumping t/tcp.
randy
___
[EMAIL PRO
Randall Stewart wrote:
> Anyway.. I do think it is stable enough for inclusion in
> stable BSD... if you have another 4.x round.. BUT we have
> not went in and fully got things working on 5.x... I know
> one of our team members (Kozuka-san) has made an effort
> to make it compile.. but it as yet do
Mark Allman wrote:
Sure. To make you sleep better it will be disabled by default (like
T/TCP) and possibly even not compliled in by default (#ifdef'd).
Part of your argument against T/TCP. :-)
A writeup will follow once I get there. I made this request before I
start working on it to prevent to
Russell L. Carter wrote:
Greetings,
It is not easy to get kame up and running, and I know this because
I have. It is beyond all ordinary production installations.
Wow.. I have never had a problem installing it.. but of
course I have worked in U**X for 20+ years... so maybe
I don't notice and am not
Marco Molteni wrote:
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bruce M Simpson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 04:33:17PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Thus after the removal of T/TCP for the reasons above I want to
provide a work-alike replacement for T/TCP's functionality:
I
Matt Emmerton wrote:
The SCTP home page (www.sctp.org) has a list of implementations. Note that
I had to use Google's cache of the site -- I believe there was a Slashdot
article on SCTP this morning which may have taken down the site.
Sigh... It is also over satellite... which is medium speed int
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, Stephane Raimbault wrote:
> I'm currently using a freebsd box running natd to forward port 80 to several
> (5) web servers on private IP's.
>
> I have discovered that natd doesn't handle many requests/second all that
> well (seem to choke at about 200 req/second (educated gues
Peter:
Yes, I do get all the bugs reported to me (usually) directly..
And I try to turn them around within a week (if possible)... I
have a couple on my plate right now from Chiba Hirotsugu ... in
fact the last batch of bugs was also from Chiba...
I know of at least 4 sites actively using the code
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, Stephane Raimbault wrote:
> I was running out of ports in the 1024-5000 range and setting my last port
> to 65535 via sysctl did solve my problem.
>
> In 4.10 what will sysctl -w net.inet.ip.portrange.randomized=0 do for me?
If you have too many quick connections between prox
12 matches
Mail list logo
