[HECnet] TCP/IP experts?
Johnny Billquist
bqt at softjar.se
Sat Feb 16 17:12:32 PST 2013
On 2013-02-17 02:05, Clem Cole wrote:
BTW: the bits have definitely rotted in my brain here, but I thought the
BBN "portable" stack was targeted to RSX years ago, I know it ran on
one of the HP systems (do not remember if it was the 3000 or the 1000).
I honestly don't know for sure, but this is the first I've ever heard of that.
Doing a "portable" stack for RSX would probably be very hard, by the way. There are definitely some quirks in RSX to take into consideration making it less easy to do something generic. In addition, unless you want really bad performance, you want to be close to the kernel, which severely restricts your memory size, making anything written in a high level language very hard. Not to mention that there are no "official" support for writing any code that interfaces to the kernel in any high level language. Not that I even could think of what language that portable stack would have been written in. C was not on the table for RSX for a long time. FORTRAN is hardly suitable, and DEC used BLISS internally, but that was not really available to the outside.
But I really thought one of the targets DARPA had for the stack was
RSX-11.
It would be interesting to find out more.
I do remember VMS was not a target, and thus we wrote the original
implementation at Tektronix in 1979, which we gave to CMU via my
connections and would become the basis for the VMS versions.
Is that the Multinet IP for VMS? Never looked at it, but it's been around for a long time. (And several people here are running it.)
Johnny
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Clem Cole <clemc at ccc.com
<mailto:clemc at ccc.com>> wrote:
right.
the Linux implementation is not the BBN/BSD scheme, but I agree
/ I'd be shocked if the Linux folks had not looked at
NET2/FreeBSD/NetBSD code (and it's too bad the Linux folks never
looked at the BBN releases post Joy's messing with the BBN version).
Note that BBN was not partly at fault for that. Very few
people ever got to see the later versions I fear.
The excuse was always CMU/MIT/BSD license vs. GNU GPL - but I
personally think was an excuse to say they needed to do it over.
Sigh...
Clem
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se
<mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote:
On 2013-02-17 01:28, Clem Cole wrote:
Linux ip/tcp stack is not the bbn/bsd derived code. it was
independently developed so the fact that they are
differences is not surprising. one of my own personal
gripes about Linux is the desire/need to redo things from
scratch (ext fs comes to find here also).
I seem to remember that they have in fact had several
implementations, as their first attempts really sucked (Linux
people take some pride in the many iterations they do of
implementations, it would seem).
I would not be surprised to learn that after a few failed
attempts, they "borrows" parts of the BSD code for their TCP/IP,
but I have not looked properly at it in quite a number of years.
Johnny
On Feb 16, 2013, at 4:41 PM, Gregg Levine
<gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com <mailto:gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Johnny Billquist
<bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote:
On 2013-02-16 01:13, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Hi. As I'm working on my TCP/IP for RSX, I just
noticed something that I
think looks funny in Linux. But right now my
head is also spinning, so
maybe there is something I've just forgotten, or
don't know, which
explains this. But if anyone can shed some
light, I'd be interested.
Just for the record - I *think* that TCP/IP in
Linux is misbehaving, but
it's not really hurting anything, but I like my
TCP/IP to really do
things as right and optimal as possible.
[...]
Any thoughts, opinions or knowledge always welcome.
Not that I've come any closer to figuring it all
out, however I thought I
should mention that I've checked some more against
both NetBSD and OS/X and
neither show the behavior I observe in Linux, so I
think I'm just going to
attribute this to a crappy implementation on the
Linux side. That's not the
first time Linux code turns out to be bad, so I'm
not totally surprised...
(And yes, I also tried VMS actually... :-) )
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a
psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>
|| Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay
hip" - B. Idol
Hello!
Johnny I've been arguing with the stack for Linux for
about as many
years as I've known about the idea of emulating our
friends, the
PDP-11 crowd and those Vaxes. And sadly it happens to be
something of
a kludge. Alan Cox and the others behind it are
constantly sorting it
out. Fact is, three-quarters of it, happens to be from
the land of BSD
and fitted into it rather awkwardly.
So your discoveries must be a surprise to a lot of us,
but it confirms
what I've known all along.
Incidentally Dave this isn't your fault.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
<mailto:gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com>
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se> ||
Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
More information about the Hecnet-list
mailing list