On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:26:08 -0700
"David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:22:02 -0400
> Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > If the congestion control alogirthm is "Reno-like", what is
> > user-visible impact to users? There are OS's out there with TCP/IP
> > stacks that are still using Reno, aren't there?
>
> An incorrect implementation of any congestion control algorithm
> has ramifications not considered when the congestion control
> author verified the design of his algorithm.
>
> This has a large impact on every user on the internet, not just
> Linux machines.
>
> Perhaps on a microscopic scale "this" part of the BIC algorithm
> was just behaving Reno-like due to the bug, but what implications
> does that error have as applied to the other heuristics in BIC?
> This is what I'm talking about. BIC operates in several modes,
> one of which is a pseudo binary search mode, and another is a
> less aggressive slower increase mode.
> Therefore I think fixes to congestion control algorithms which
> are enabled by default always should take a high priority in
> the stable kernels.
Also, hopefully distro vendors will pick up 2.6.11.X fixes and update their
customers.
|