Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:26:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:26:48 -0500 Received: from router-100M.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.17]:46597 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:26:30 -0500 Subject: Re: LILO and serial speeds over 9600 To: hpa@transmeta.com (H. Peter Anvin) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:25:47 +0000 (GMT) Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox), jas88@cam.ac.uk (James Sutherland), hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3A885F72.ED9ADAE8@transmeta.com> from "H. Peter Anvin" at Feb 12, 2001 02:10:58 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > This is true, but one thing I'd really like to have is controlled buffer > overrun, which TCP *doesn't* have. I really think an ad hoc UDP protocol > (I've already begun sketching on the details) is more appropriate in this > particular case. Explain 'controlled buffer overrun'. BTW if you make it UDP please include something like SHA hash or tea hash and shared secret - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://vger.kernel.org/lkml/