Subject: Re: rdist vs. sup
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
Date: 03/03/1995 13:43:07
>> I'd like it if TCP could catch these...
> It can't. Get over it!
Well, mostly. Nothing is perfect...but even a 16-bit CRC would be a
lot better than the joke of a checksum that's in there at present.
> Seriously, though, on an ethernet you don't see this kind of
> corruption to an extent that matters,
Probably largely because Ethernet uses a real CRC already, at the
> Nonetheless, since a lot of us NetBSD hackers are in fact on the
> other end of slip or ppp connections, a 32-bit CRC in sup would be a
> big win.
I think a bigger win would be to junk any IP-over-serial code that
doesn't include decent checksumming! CRC checks in sup would help
sup...but nothing else. Perhaps _you_ don't care if other services
carry corrupted data, but _I_ sure do. It's why my netlink does use
real checksums at a fairly low level.