Re: TCPIP stack needs work?

On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Tod Detre wrote: > I'm not really sure. I haven't seen it myself, but they claim that their ping > times (where quake2 ping times are 2 things put together. One the ping between > the server and the client. Two it adds something with the frames per second) > get worse as the m

Re: TCPIP stack needs work?

I'm not really sure. I haven't seen it myself, but they claim that thier ping times (where quake2 ping times are 2 things put together. One the ping between the server and the client. Two it adds simething with the frames per second) get worse as the more clients join. This is understandable, but t

Re: TCPIP stack needs work?

I'd be interested to hear about this. Can you give me information more specific than tha freeBSD is better? For instance, is it latency, code path, reliability, what? Tod Detre wrote: > I'm on the quake 2 server mailing list and recently they are complaining about > linux's tcp/ip stack. A few

TCPIP stack needs work?

I'm on the quake 2 server mailing list and recently they are complaining about linux's tcp/ip stack. A few of them said that free=bsd and ever NT work better than linux. This is for when there is >10 peoplæ connected. What I want to know is this. Is this really something in the tcpip stack or is