Re: announcing rump kernel TCP/IP stack for DPDK

[Antti Kantee <pooka-X3B1VOXEql0@public.gmane.org>]

On 23.05.2013 21:20, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> I'm aware of the paper you linked given that I wrote it.  I don't agree
>> that it supports your claim "already done several times before".
>
> I was more worried about multiple different TCP-IP stacks that seem
> to be only used by small number of people and not maintained. Doing full
> TCP/IP is hard, and there are lots of features inside.
> It would be great to have one that is well supported and maintained.

I'm also well aware that doing TCP/IP right is very very hard.  It's not 
possible sit down with the spec for a weekend, write up some code, and 
hope it will work in the real world.  That's why I didn't implement 
TCP/IP.  The implementation I mentioned is the unmodified NetBSD kernel 
TCP/IP stack running on a very thin hypervisor layer.  It's not 
maintained by a few people, it's literally maintained by the entire 
NetBSD community.  Furthermore, it's not a set of patches available for 
the NetBSD kernel updated every now and then, it's literally [in] the 
kernel.  It's been working this way since 2008.  What I did now was just 
write 200 lines of code to plug the TCP/IP stack onto DPDK.

Hopefully that convinced you that it's not just some random one-shot 
kinda-works-except-in-reality bitrot attractor ;)

   - antti