site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080228) rimas@cnmat.berkeley.edu wrote: If frequently dropping packets with only 40% of the available bandwidth being utilized and no load on the machine other than an application listening for and peeking at the contents of said packets is considered OK then I will stick to Linux for my low latency, high bandwidth network applications (and encourage others to do likewise). UDP can drop as many packets as it wants to, that's why it's UDP. William Kucharski _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... Granted, it shouldn't be taxing the processor as heavily as it is, and IMHO that's an issue, but you really can't complain much about dropped packets unless you start dropping TCP packets. I don't think it should be quite so easy to overflow the Yukon2 ring buffers, either, but I don't know what its design constraints were. Given Linux doesn't have the same issues, it is of course a software problem, the question is whether it's a bug or a legitimate design feature. It's more than possible Apple engineers decided it was acceptable to lose occasional UDP packets in favor of making sure some other portion of the kernel was more isochronous in nature. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com