[Standards-JIG] Re: What happened to the ACK proposal?
sneakin at semanticgap.com
Mon Aug 15 05:19:56 UTC 2005
David Chisnall wrote:
> A good implementation of a TCP API would throw an exception (or invoke
> a callback) when this occurred, passing the unsent data (i.e. the data
> for which no ACK has been received) as an argument. Unfortunately, I
> have never seen a good TCP API (everyone standardised on the Berkley
> socket API which is brain-dead in so very many ways).
There's been at least two occasions where I've publicly complained about
Linux's TCP handling especialy with PPP connections. This is definitely
one area that Windows has the leg up on Linux, and the Linux PPP mailing
list wasn't very receptive the first time I complained about it saying
it's the design of TCP not to be associated with a device.
I'd still like to see some implementations of JEP-Ack though even if we
had ideal TCP APIs.
More information about the Standards