Subject: Re: perhaps time to check our TCP against spec?
To: Erik E. Fair <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
Date: 04/07/1998 19:29:27
On Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:21:01 -0700
"Erik E. Fair" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> We're talking about a lot of things here. I have what I believe is a simple
> Is there any combination of TCP implementations (and options) under
> discussion here in which the peers WILL NOT interoperate? (i.e. No data
> will correctly pass between the hosts).
There are, to my knowledge, no behaviors in NetBSD's TCP which will cause
it to not interoperate with any other TCP implementation (unless, of course,
that other TCP has serious bugs which cause it to have interoperability
problems, but I think that goes without saying).
> If the answer is Yes, then I think we have an issue that must be dealt with
> in such a way that interoperation happens instead of not.
> If the answer is No, then we're arguing over performance optimization of
> transition cases, which, while useful, should not bar progress.
> To make this absolutely clear - my first requirement is that interoperation
> happen. My second requirement is that progress (PMTU, etc) not be impeded,
> so long as the first rule is not violated.
Thank you, Erik, for putting this so well. I happens to be my position,
Jason R. Thorpe email@example.com
NASA Ames Research Center Home: +1 408 866 1912
NAS: M/S 258-5 Work: +1 650 604 0935
Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: +1 415 428 6939