The title of the article seems familiar to you? Naturally it would, when you read something like this. But I do state the corresponding sentence isn't even grammatically correct, thereby making it difficult for me to parody. I am sure that Linux is not close to extinction but is rather gaining momentum or at least holding its ground.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-10
I know the XP supports full IPSec in hardware. I don't know when did BSD support IPSec in hardware, do you know? Which year?
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPSec Linux only supported IPSec in 2.6 so what's your point?
Why no appreciation for Windows supporting TOE, RSS etc in hardware?
Let us see how mods me up or down;)
Member since:2005-08-18
"I don't know when did BSD support IPSec in hardware, do you know? Which year?"
OpenBSD has supported IPSec since 1997 and has supported hardware accelerated IPsec since 2000.
"According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPSec Linux only supported IPSec in 2.6 so what's your point?"
That the strongest cipher MS supports is 3DES and
and freeSWAN has been around for longer than kernel 2.6.
"I know the XP supports full IPSec in hardware."
MS IPsec doesn't support anything stronger than 3DES and considering how abysmally slow 3DES is that is a good thing. Meanwhile, *BSD, Linux and many others has moved on to the much, much faster and much more secure AES and Blowfish
"Why no appreciation for Windows supporting TOE, RSS etc in hardware?"
Since I don't use Windows, especially not for networking tasks, i have no reason to "appreciate" it since it doesn't concern me.
If it makes networking better and faster on Windows (something it desperately needs) that's good for Windows users but it does not necessarily affect other OS's.
Edited 2006-12-06 13:19
Member since:2005-07-06
Again, this constantly flipping around between Linux as kernel and Linux as OS is starting to rear its ugly head. IPsec has been supported under Linux (the OS, and also the kernel if you count external modules) since the inception of FreeS/WAN somewhere in the nineties. This is also mentioned in that Wikipedia article. FreeS/WAN ended, and now continues development (yes, even with "native" support) under the name of Openswan. Even without counting FreeS/WAN and its successors, there have been IPsec implementations in Linux long before Microsoft became security aware all of a sudden.
Please compare apples to apples, and not switch back and forth between various interpretations of the term "Linux" as you see fit to support your arguments.
As said before, TOE *is* hardware. All you need is drivers to support it, and those are available to OSes which make sense to use in a datacenter where the use of TOE makes any sense in the firstplace. Yes, that includes Linux.
Member since:2005-11-14
I know the XP supports full IPSec in hardware. I don't know when did BSD support IPSec in hardware, do you know? Which year?
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPSec Linux only supported IPSec in 2.6 so what's your point?
Windows *XP* supports full IPSec in *hardware*.
You're really an amazing guy. Do you understand what a driver is ?
The rest is the same kind of rubbish. Really we can't have a serious discussion.
Member since:
2005-08-18
"Still the one that says TOE is bad gets modden up and the one that shows TOE is better gets modden down"
I think it's too early to say either way and even if it would be beneficial for Windows that doesnt mean it would be beneficial for other OS's that are using different stacks and kernels.
Same goes for "RSS".
You're not really one to talk about "fanboys" though, you come across as a pretty big fanboy yourself in your posts.
You talk about how "advanced hardware support" isn't available in BSD and Linux. Hmm..guess who had a generic framework for hardware accelerated cryptography long before Windows? Why has Windows still (with XP) such substandard IPSEC support (3DES? In 2006?) when both *BSD and Linux has much more mature and secure implementations?
Point being, different technologies develop at different speeds for different platforms.