As I understand it, the idea behind not requiring flow-control in IL
was that the higher level protocols would take care of this; in 9P
(which is the main user of IL), there's a reply to each request, so if
the server is replying slowly, the client will slow down to compensate.
I don't think IL is suitable for simply sending packets to hosts, it
must have a request-response protocol layered on top of it.
Yes, this requires the higher level protocol knows about doing
flow-control stuff like nagle, but the idea is that the TCP layer doesn't
_really_ know what the application requires and setting options such as
TCP_NODELAY is a crude way of telling it.
-- Matthew Wilcox <willy@bofh.ai> "Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/