Thanks David. Valid point if it is indeed the case. I'm just starting into this, and have not read the reference you sent me. I will do so and make sure I include some of this information in the presentation I am making. Thanks again. -----Original Message----- From: David S. Miller [mailto:davem@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 8:25 AM To: Jamie.Esliger@SiliconAccess.com Cc: linux-net@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Full TCP Offload? From: Jamie Esliger <Jamie.Esliger@SiliconAccess.com> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 08:14:43 -0400 However, at this point this is a customer driven request. If a customer comes to us and says "I can get full offload from Vendor X... can you guys do it? We'll buy your product if you can." Then powers above me will make the choice to implement or not based on $$ and $$ alone. I might be the one to implement, but I don't make the decision whether or not to implement. Just remember that those customers will come back to you a few months later and ask why there is next to zero performance benefit from the more expensive TOE solution compared to the TSO+checksum offloading solution. So even from a business$$ perspective, it's stupid, you're making technology cost more for your customers, and even if they are stupid about the situation now, they'll wise up later. - : 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
