| To: | Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] TCP Vegas for 2.6 |
| From: | Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 9 Mar 2004 11:03:23 -0800 |
| Cc: | John Heffner <jheffner@xxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, linux-net <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <404E1374.5050600@us.ibm.com> |
| Organization: | Open Source Development Lab |
| References: | <20040309180331.GC11604@wotan.suse.de> <Pine.NEB.4.33.0403091307090.5230-100000@dexter.psc.edu> <20040309102206.33c1720c@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> <404E1374.5050600@us.ibm.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 10:56:52 -0800 Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Every case I tested has vegas faster than the default reno. It is > > especially > > noticeable over the DSL. The current implementation is not ready to be > > turned > > on by default though. > > Stephen, just a question regarding your testing. > (To save me some effort ;-)). What tests did you > run, which testcases, and if it wasn't some standard > benchmark, will you consider inclusion of those tests into > the LTP or equivalent? I used ttcp and netperf, but the tests aren't as interesting as setting up the toplogies, like 1G Ethernet; Ethernet -> PPP -> Ethernet and Ethernet -> IRDA -> Ethernet and DSL connections through SSH. Plus, LTP (and are local automated test machines) don't seem to be setup for multi-machine tests. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] TCP Vegas for 2.6, Nivedita Singhvi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: ip addr flush hangs, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] TCP Vegas for 2.6, Nivedita Singhvi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] TCP Vegas for 2.6, Nivedita Singhvi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |