Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- From: Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 11:03:22 +0100
Stop making excuses, with minor adjustments we have the facilities to
meet your needs. There is no need for yet-another-protocol to do what
I suspect they would be better of just using IP multicast. But the localhost
latency penalty vs Unix Chris was talking about probably needs to be investigated.
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- AF_IPN: Inter Process Networking, try these...
- From: Renzo Davoli
- AF_IPN: Inter Process Networking, try these...
- References:
- Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- From: Chris Friesen
- Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- From: David Miller
- Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- From: Chris Friesen
- Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- From: David Miller
- Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] scheduler: fix x86 regression in native_sched_clock
- Next by Date: [PATCH] Add support for the S-35390A RTC chip.
- Previous by thread: Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)
- Next by thread: AF_IPN: Inter Process Networking, try these...
- Index(es):