Replacing C

[Hal Murray]

kurt at roeckx.be said:
>> We could fix that with another packet.  The idea is that you
>> get a time stamp from the kernel on the transmit side.  Then
>> you have to send another packet to get that time stamp to
>> the other end.

> Didn't the support for that get removed? Or am I confusing it with something
> else? 

I think I remember something like that.  I never used it.  I don't know if 
there was working code or just talk.  Anybody remember the keyword?


> Adjusting the timestamp to when you think it'll leave will clearly improve
> the accuracy, assuming it's a good estimate. And is something that you could
> in theory when not using crypto either by keeping stats and when the packet
> actually left. It would then not need this extra packet. 

Assuming that the crypto is the only major chunk of CPU cycles, you could use 
an estimate, then check again just before sending the packet.  If your 
estimate was too far off you could try again.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.