Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Sep 2005 12:24 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 37504
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
>"WFP is more secure, integrated in the stack, and much easier for independent software vendors (ISVs) to build drivers, services, and applications that must filter, analyze, or modify TCP/IP traffic."
"The Next-Generation TCP/IP stack has an infrastructure to enable more modular components that can be dynamically inserted and removed." <
That's funny i remember an earlier article saying how MSFT was going to remove direct TCP/IP access from end users and software.




Member since:
2005-06-29
As far as their NextGen TCP/IP implementation doesn't break RFCs, I welcome new stack. Current TCP/IP is working well, but it's apparently a mess inside.
Well, look at next sentences in pointed article (my italic):
"WFP is more secure, integrated in the stack, and much easier for independent software vendors (ISVs) to build drivers, services, and applications that must filter, analyze, or modify TCP/IP traffic."
"The Next-Generation TCP/IP stack has an infrastructure to enable more modular components that can be dynamically inserted and removed."
What we get finally:
[NextGen TCP/IP stack should be] more secure, [but it's] much easier for [anybody to] modify TCP/IP traffic [and/or] insert more [unwanted] components dynamically.
:)