News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by riffraff on Friday November 26, 2010 @10:24AM (#1942539)
I don't think any web server gets to this level of control on the tcp/ip level, this is something that should be addressed in the OS' network stack.
Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by eru on Friday November 26, 2010 @11:02AM (#1942615)
Unless you have an exokernel operating system.
Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by riffraff on Friday November 26, 2010 @04:06PM (#1943306)
Nah, that's not even necessary, I believe: the congestion window is a TCP feature, but any normal user space program (with a few privileges) can create IP datagrams with custom content, so you would only need to implement a bit of tcp in a normal old style monolithic kernel

And since you control the only higher level protocol (your http implementation) you can probably cut some corners and get done quickly :)

Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by panic on Saturday November 27, 2010 @02:51PM (#1945706)
You may be able to create them, but as a server, how would you receive incoming connections?
Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by daeken on Friday November 26, 2010 @04:04PM (#1943301)
No need for an exokernel here. A microkernel could enable the same thing, since your network stack would be Yet Another Service (TM). This could easily be implemented on the likes of L4.
Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by wmf on Saturday November 27, 2010 @12:38AM (#1944387)
I don't really see the difference between patching the kernel and patching the privileged network stack server in a microkernel environment.
Re:Google and Microsoft Cheat on Slow-Start. Should You? by eru on Saturday November 27, 2010 @09:58AM (#1945038)
In an exokernel environment, the network stack server wouldn't be privileged.