Waldemar Kornewald <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx> wrote: > the netstack of FreeBSD 5.3 will have some nice features and speed > improvements. Additionally, their netstack is finally thread-safe > (and > multi-threaded). Our netstack is a port of an older version and thus > not > thread-safe. > I did not port that beast, so I do not know what is harder to do: > - port the new netstack > - make our netstack thread-safe and extend with functionality > (non-blocking support, etc.) > > IMHO, it would be very useful if we had a nice port including > documentation about changes made to the port. If we can create a > layer > around the stack's core and module layers around the protocols it > might > become rather easy to port new releases and always have an up-to-date > and stable netstack. While we maintain the port we can also slowly > write > our own stack, compare speeds, and improve it until it is better and > at > the same time smaller and cleaner. Why writing our own then? Why not just moving the ported stack over to exactly match our needs? And I don't mean a nice C++ API here, because that thing just sits in the kernel anyway :) > What do you think? How much work would a new port (we can reuse > existing > code and experience) and fixing/extending the current port mean? Dunno - that depends on how far you left David's work on making our stack thread-safe behind. Because that was pretty unusable. Bye, Axel.