| To: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 2.6.10 TCP troubles -- suggested patch |
| From: | Rick Jones <rick.jones2@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:42:48 -0800 |
| In-reply-to: | <20050215152651.58f5ccc0.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <0525M9211@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050211150420.74737b2e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050211170740.2608419b.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050212141641.GA27456@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050212114132.5f7b7ffe.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050212200318.GB28895@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050215152651.58f5ccc0.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; HP-UX 9000/785; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040304 |
In short, for properly working TCP stream with no drops and no reordering, Darwin delays ACKs until delack timer fires or PSH is seen :-) As a supporter of ACK avoidance heuristics in general, I will come-out and say that the heuristic above does indeed sound quite broken. It is not the heuristic with which I am familiar, which has a configurable maximum number of segments for which to delay the ACK. rick jones |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [IPSEC] Merge xfrm4_bundle_ok/xfrm6_bundle_ok/stale_bundle, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] VLAN over bonding, Jay Vosburgh |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 2.6.10 TCP troubles -- suggested patch, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 2.6.10 TCP troubles -- suggested patch, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |