On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 10:07:01AM -0800, Nivedita Singhvi wrote: > Andrew McGregor wrote: > > In a closed network, why not have SOCK_STREAM map to something faster than > > TCP anyway? That is, if I connect(address matching localnet), SOCK_STREAM > > maps to (eg) SCTP. That would be a far more dramatic performance hack! > > > > Andrew > > Not that simple. SCTP (if that is what Matti was referring to) is > a SOCK_STREAM socket, with a protocol of IPPROTO_SCTP. I'm just > getting done implementing a testsuite against the SCTP API. Most likely that is what I did mean. Things in IETF do on occasion change names, or I don't always remember all characters in (E)TLA-acronyms I use rarely... ... > But dont expect SCTP to be the surreptitious underlying layer > carrying TCP traffic, if thats an expectation that anyone has :) At least I didn't expect that, don't know of others. It all depends on application coders, if users will be able to use arbitrary network protocols -- say any SOCK_STREAM protocol supported now, and in future by system kernel. Ever heard of "TLI" ? > Solving this problem without application involvement is a > more limited scenario.. Yes, but sufficiently important to occasionally. Doing things like this mapping might make limited sense via routing table lookups. > thanks, > Nivedita /Matti Aarnio - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
