Andy Schweig (firstname.lastname@example.org)
19 Aug 88 18:46:08 GMT
In article <8808160634.AA03685@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> dcrocker@TWG.COM (Dave Crocker) writes:
>Steve Alexander cites Lachman's Streams implementation as containing
>Van's performance enhancements. While the congestion control enhancements
>drop in relatively easily, it is my understanding that Van has not yet
>released his header-prediction changes. I would be interested to know
>the origins of the code that Lachman acquired. Steve?
Steve did not mention anything about Van's header prediction code.
Since it was not available at the time of our last release, it was
not included. What we did include was all of the available
congestion control algorithms from Van et al.
>With respect to the ease of adding Berkeley code to Streams, the key is
>the degree of conformance to streams architecture. One can be formally
>conformant, but still have variations is certain features.
It is certainly true that some of the Berkeley code requires modification
before it can be incorporated into a STREAMS-based implementation. Some
of it, in fact, is conceptually incompatible with the STREAMS approach.
However, changes in areas such as congestion control rarely present any
problems. Since our product is based on the 4.3BSD TCP/IP code, these
changes pretty much just dropped right in. In areas of the code such as
this that deal with the mechanics of the TCP protocol itself, there are
virtually no STREAMS dependencies, so the fact that our code is
STREAMS-based was not an issue.
Andy Schweig - TCP/IP Development
Lachman Associates, Inc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:43:13 GMT