From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [PATCH] new UDPCP Communication Protocol Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:39:59 +0100 Message-ID: <1294051199.2892.198.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <1294007971-18878-1-git-send-email-stefani@seibold.net> <1294008562.2535.263.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1294008917.18963.3.camel@wall-e> <1294045732.19666.6.camel@wall-e> <1294046867.2892.101.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1294048469.20187.13.camel@wall-e> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Jesper Juhl , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@vyatta.com, daniel.baluta@gmail.com, jochen@jochen.org To: Stefani Seibold Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1294048469.20187.13.camel@wall-e> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Le lundi 03 janvier 2011 =C3=A0 10:54 +0100, Stefani Seibold a =C3=A9cr= it : > How can you do a routing, how can you determinate the MTU of the rout= e. > This are basics. Look into other code how this things will be handled= is > in my opinion the right way, since there a no function provide to do > this. >=20 Hmm, how user land can perform this task then ? Is there an open source implementation of UDPCP ? What are its problems ? You say its dog slow, I really wonder why. UDP stack is pretty scalable these days, yet some improvements are possible. Why not adding generic helpers if you believe you miss some infrastructure ? This could benefit to other 'stacks' as well. > Otherwise you can say the same about all the filesystem or PCI > drvivers , which do also a lot in the same way. But since this is the > way to do it, it is the right way. >=20 These drivers are here because of high performance on top of high performance specs. While UDPCP is only a layer above UDP. If the problem comes from UDP being too slow, it'll be slow too.