On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:24, Steve Sizemore wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 12:09:28AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Steve Sizemore wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 12:18:11AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > In fact, the only legitimate argument I have ever heard for UDP > > > > has been "I have an old Linux install that can't talk TCP, as > > > > only UDP was implemented at the time I installed it". > > > > > > Have you already forgotten the locking problem that you were > > > helping me with last week? The only solution was to use UDP. > > > > Working around a screwed up implementation is not a "legitimate" > > argument. The only legitimate argument to that is "unscrewing" > > the implementation. > > > > 8-). > > I agree with that to a degree - at least from the perspective of a > developer. (If I had the knowledge and time to unscrew the > implementation, I would certainly try.) However, for those who are > primarily sysadmins and FreeBSD advocates, using UDP is a legitimate > alternative to switching to linux. I do not think switching to Linux will fix that TCP Vs UDP issue. I'm in need of an NFS TCP server. Well, at version 2.4.18, I still do not have it. I have a need to run tCP for NFS and not use UDP. For now, FreeBSD will be serving me up NFS shares. > > Steve > -- > Steve Sizemore <steve_at_ls.berkeley.edu>, (510) 642-8570 > Unix System Manager > Dept. of Mathematics and College of Letters and Science > University of California, Berkeley > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"Received on Thu Mar 27 2003 - 09:41:33 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:02 UTC