Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!nntp.se.dataphone.net!nntp.uio.no!newsfeeds.sol.net!uwm.edu!news.he.net!cnn.nas.nasa.gov!gecko.nas.nasa.gov!kml From: kml@gecko.nas.nasa.gov (Kevin M. Lahey) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: NetBSD vs FreeBSD, kernel networking code Date: 27 Mar 1997 04:39:20 GMT Organization: NAS, NASA/Ames Lines: 24 Message-ID: <5hctlo$hva$1@cnn.nas.nasa.gov> References: <5h9a1g$ela@qnx.com> <333948B2.4E6E@cstone.net> <3339880A.52D3@cstone.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: gecko.nas.nasa.gov Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:5699 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:37795 In article <3339880A.52D3@cstone.net>, Paul Nguyen <pauln@cstone.net> wrote: >Paul Nguyen wrote: > > Doug Santry wrote: > > I know that both NetBSD and FreeBSD are based on the Lite/1 tape. > But both camps have been fixing bugs in the code. So while both have > a common ancestor, I assume they have diverged a little by now. > What are some of the differences between the two? I am interested in > new features and bug fixes. For instance, FreeBSD has T/TCP support. > Does NetBSD? Are there resource limits that have been fixed in one and > not the other? Does one handle the SYN_RCVD attack better than the > other? > > No detail is too trivial. FreeBSD has lots of cool networking changes. The changes are so complete that lots of Net/[123] based code, like the NRL IPv6/IPsec stack, doesn't work on FreeBSD. OTOH, there are lots of cool new things, like path MTU discovery and ISS munging, that are a real win. If you are interested in new features that are fully integrated into the release, FreeBSD might be the right choice. Kevin