[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?
From: |
Thomas Bushnell, BSG |
Subject: |
Re: Why GNU Mach is so different? |
Date: |
07 Jan 2002 15:42:42 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 |
Farid Hajji <farid.hajji@ob.kamp.net> writes:
> Hmmm... I use multicasting on *BSD boxes very heavily since years
> and it works flawlessly. Cisco used to have some bugs in their PIM
> Sparse tree pruning implementation, but they fixed that approx. 9
> months ago. I used multicasting accross the public Internet without
> problems (but alas not so intensively).
What's uncertain is the availability of good multicast routing to any
random location on the internet.
> Please tell us more about collectives. That is a very hot topic!
It's more "I wonder how XXX might work", and then if I've thought
about it, I'm happy to set it down. But I need more specific
prompting to know what to say.
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/05
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/05
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/05
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/05
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/01/05
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/06
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/01/06
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/07
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?,
Thomas Bushnell, BSG <=
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Eray Ozkural (exa), 2002/01/09
- Re: Why GNU Mach is so different?, Farid Hajji, 2002/01/23