On 2/19/08, Mayuresh Kathe  wrote:

quoted text
>  something as good as FireEngine,

I'm following this thread with quite some amusement, but one thing is

not in the least clear to me: why do you think you want "something as

good as FireEngine". Heck, even under the assumption FireEngine is

Really Good (TM), you should compare it to  the *new* stack of FreeBSD,

whose marketing blurb has at least a bit more meaty than Sun's.

http://www.meetbsd.org/storage/kris.kennaway_meetbsd2007.pdf
SO now do you want FireEngine? Or rather SMPng networking? Or

would you like ReallyHyperFastZoomStreamCyberWoosh?

You can't decide?
You have not even shown a corner case, much less in general why

it would be desirable to completely throw away the current

architecture. I use OpenBSD since 3.0 on very small CPUs and also

on rather big ones (all i386 and amd64, though), and I don't remember

a single case in which network stack performance wouldn't at least

have met my expectations.
What performance difference are you expecting? Do you know

the implications, which the different approaches impose on the

kernel architecture? Even if there would be a developer,  who would

in principle be open to the idea, you have to show her that it is worth

the hassle. But you don't even know what you're talking about.
If *I* were a developer, I would be offended by the notion that

AnotherSolution is *that* *much* *better* (as you imply) _without_

showing any evidence.
--knitti