Top: Computers: Hardware:
See also:
| This category in other languages: |
| | |
 |
|
» Hardware Central - Community and forum providing news, reviews, reports, and editorials on computer hardware.
|
 |
|
» VLSI Discussion Forum - Covers many related topics: EDA tools, VHDL, Verilog; fabrication; FPGAs, ASICs, microprocessors, semiconductors, CMOS.
|
- Re: Disadvanteges of Windowed Register File (like Am29k)
In article <i5pc5m$fc...@news.eternal-sep tember.org>, step...@sprunk.org
says...
Seriously? Microsoft Visual C 2005 does it. Helps alot with some code...
- Tim
- Fill Form And Get $10,000 From PayPal.
Fill Form And Get $10,000 From PayPal At [link]
Due to high security risks, i have hidden the PAYPAL FORM link in an
image. in that website on Right Side below search box, click
on image and enter your name and PAYPAL ID.
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
The idea is to keep using those old devices and add new devices which would
enable
the privacy.
Only one device in the path is needed to give some form of privacy.
Existing devices would remain compatible.
This is something which needs to be tested or looked into, to see how
existing
devices would behave with the new slightly different packets.
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.protocols.tcp-ip.]
It would break TCP.
UDP-based protocols keep state too, and are just as picky about where
the datagram came from as TCP. You cannot expect every datagram to
contain full context, so the application protocol uses the source
address:port (and maybe destination too) as a key to lookup state for
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
Note that requiring *any* changes to existing implementations is pretty much a
no-go. There are plenty of IP devices out there which can never be upgraded.
Your scheme requires that routers process packets in software and keep a table
of translations which could potentially grow very large, particularly since it
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
While I did not think of multiple paths the idea would still work.
The packets from a flow could be routed among different paths and get their
own treatment.
The end result would be that the destination/end point gets packets from it
would seem
different sources, for a tcp protocol this could be a problem.
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 06:25:49 +0100, Skybuck Flying
There's your mistake. You cannot talk about "the" path from source to
destination because in general there are multiple paths and different
packets in the same TCP flow might travel by different routes.
NAT, which you mention in a later post, only works because everyone in the
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
[snip]
[snip]
A presumably very dumb argument from an ignorant: You are apparently
modifying a standard and that's generally not a good idea IMHO except
though the standardization gremium. I can't strongly argue in the
field of data transmission because my knowledge there is extremely
poor, but in the presumably akin field of standardization of
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
(snip)
There is already a system for doing this, though not at the IP level.
It is available for those protocols for which it seems useful.
It would be a lot of work, and little gain, to do it for
protocols that it isn't needed for.
-- glen
- Re: Renamer Port Reduction
Possibly relevant anecdotes:
At SC09, in some session about how to teach parallel programming, the
speaker asked the audience who found parallel programming easier than
sequential. I was the only person who raised my hand. I distinctly
remember how, in one of my first programming class exercises at McGill,
- Re: Renamer Port Reduction
Not asymptotically.
Extrapolating trends we might build machines that are not multithreaded
- that when they take a cache miss, don't switch to a different thread,
but just block.
I tried to formulate a rule of thumb: Q: when do you add a second
core rather than doubling the number of threads? A: when the wire cost
- Re: New High Bandwidth Supercomputer
I do like it, particularly that optical hub with 48x7=336 bidirectional
10 Gbit/s links. :-)
Terje
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
Though to further clearify this potential kink in the cable... it
would/could only be a kink in the cable for ipv4... not for newly designed
protocols
perhaps ipv6 can still be modified or future protocols.
Perhaps those future protocols could reserve a part of the address space for
"fake addresses" for privacy.
- Re: Renamer Port Reduction
I believe some of us do, i.e. after enough years hand-optimizing asm
code we develop a feel for what is hard and what is easy for the cpu to
do. Some of my own internal rules are obviously not exactly right, but
close enough to mostly help get a good result.
When I stop to think about it, like now, I feel that it is similar to
- Re: Extending IPv4 with source translation/source privacy.
Another way of looking at this idea is from the point of "address
translation" also known as NAT.
I'm a bit rusty about NAT but as far as I remember NAT works by using public
available resources like public ip addresses, and public ports and tries
to attach a single public ip address and multiple public ports to multiple