Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler

Andre Oppermann andre at
Sun Jul 3 01:01:36 GMT 2005

Mark Allman 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 haven't fully digested this yet.  But, I'll voice my distaste for
> implementing things that just seem to "Make Sense".  That's a model that
> has been used and is used by other operating systems and those of us who
> watch packets can attest that things that "Make Sense" often don't and
> likely would have benefitted by a bit more thought and a bit more
> vetting.  I would be happier if something like this were vetted out a
> bit more (written up, digested by folks, etc.)  before it went into
> anything but someone's experimental kernel.  Just my two cents.

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).  If
enabled and compiled in it does not automatically enable itself for all
and everything.  The application has to enable it on the socket as well.

A writeup will follow once I get there.  I made this request before I
start working on it to prevent to waste my time on it if people wanted
to religiously stick to T/TCP.

freebsd-arch at mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe at"

More information about the freebsd-net mailing list