Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Vista's TCP/IP Promises and Perils

Posted by kdawson on from the packet-to-go dept.

boyko.at.netqos tips us to a new writeup on Vista's TCP/IP stack, which is called Compound TCP/IP (CTCP). From the article: "...security policy will come from a centralized source. When you get your DHCP lease, your computer will report to the stack what OS you're using, what version level, what patches, what anti-virus software that's active — all that kind of stuff. It will have the ability to restrict your network access if you have a down-level machine... We could see a lot of our customers with much higher WAN network utilization because of this new TCP/IP stack... CTCP can be enabled/disabled from the command prompt but there has been no mention of tuning parameters which leads us to ask the question: How are you supposed to configure this setting in Vista?... What worries us... is that Microsoft is basing this on packet round trip time. The round-trip time from the client-side will have the server processing time in it; but the clients aren't likely going to be the running the CTCP at first. If you have a server-to-server backup running, for example, CTCP may think its part of the round-trip time and it'll throw the delay window through the roof..."

7 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Re:invitation by udderly · · Score: -1, Troll

    I was wondering about this. Is this some type of homoerotic thing?

  2. Microsoft security man... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1, Troll

    which is called Compound TCP/IP (CTCP). From the article: "...security policy will come from a centralized source.

    Yeah, trust a blind man to invent a new pencil...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  3. Vista = Cable Box by kurt555gs · · Score: 0, Troll

    It seems that M$'s vision of having your computer being nothing more than a "content delivery device" that you have to buy and they control is coming to fruition.

    It is amazing to me how far those people that use M$ products will allow themselves to be, 0wn3d.

    Change is hard and scary, but why would one ever actually pay to be treated in the manner M$ wants to treat you.

    Sheep.

    Cheers

    PS> This is not a troll, it is really the way I feel.

    --
    * Carthago Delenda Est *
  4. Re:It will have the ability to restrict your netwo by Kjuib · · Score: -1, Troll

    Any machine that is not running ONLY microsoft products. I thought that was a given?!

    --
    - Your stupidity got you into this mess, why can't it get you out? -Will Rogers
  5. Re:Why build it into the stack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Child, nobody listen to people who spell "Microsoft" "M$".

  6. Re:It will have the ability to restrict your netwo by just_another_sean · · Score: 0, Troll

    Downlevel = Anything from MS that's not => Windows 6.0 and everything not sold by MS.

    At least that's my guess.

    --
    Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
  7. Re:10 LET M$ = "Microsoft" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Which items of Paul Rogers' laundry list did twitter's comment violate?

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=211418&cid=172 18016

    a lot of people thus use M$ to imply

    A "lot of people"? Wow, a "lot of people" use "M$" to imply a dozen other things. That's irrelevant, but I always find it amusing that someone needs to go to the trouble of rationalizing it. It's easy as hell to rationalize "open sores" or "Linsux", but I don't try to, and I don't do "creative spelling" as general. I find most people who have a habit of doing so are functional retards, but that's another problem.