Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id g15NJHD22531 for netdev-outgoing; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 15:19:17 -0800 Received: from acl.lanl.gov (acl.lanl.gov [128.165.147.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id g15NJCA22528 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 15:19:12 -0800 Received: (qmail 1102930 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2002 16:19:11 -0700 Received: from xed.acl.lanl.gov (128.165.147.191) by acl.lanl.gov with SMTP; 5 Feb 2002 16:19:11 -0700 Received: (qmail 31853 invoked by uid 4480); 5 Feb 2002 16:19:11 -0700 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Feb 2002 16:19:11 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:19:11 -0700 (MST) From: Matt Sottile X-X-Sender: To: Ronald G Minnich cc: , , , Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-netdev@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk > > Such curcumstances just do not exist in the nature. > > As far as you know. You have not seen it so do not believe it. I guess I > have to disagree with you here :-) > > "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of ..." So now that we've shown that our program does in fact exist, and does lose significant performance due to nastiness in the linux TCP implementation, what does this mean? Since this program exists in our universe, does this mean that we must not exist in order to preserve this pristine, happy-ack universe you're referring to? Seems asking for an example or such would be more productive than simply assuming that a set of programs simply can't exist. Sorry for the mini-flame, but I think responses to potential bugs or performance issues with "that doesn't exist" deserves it... --m