Regardless of which implementation gets selected, however, I would
like to emphasize, once again, that SACK is really very important,
especially given the packet drop rates on the current internet.

Perry

John Hawkinson writes:
> > Has anybody looked at this?
> 
> [ in reference to the UCB/LBL SACK implementation ]
> 
> I don't think so; someone else has been working on a seperate
> implementation for NetBSD.
> 
> Once the initial implementations are out it will make some sense to
> look at multiple ones and pick and choose, but it will probably be
> easiest to adopt the one written for NetBSD.
> 
> Discussion/announcement happens on tcplw@bsdi.com (mail to
> tcplw-request to join).
> 
> --jhawk
>