netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC] TCP Vegas for 2.6

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC] TCP Vegas for 2.6
From: John Heffner <jheffner@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 13:11:11 -0500 (EST)
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>, linux-net <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20040309180331.GC11604@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Andi Kleen wrote:

> > I would be very cautious about turning on Vegas by default.  In certain
> > cases, it is exactly the right thing to do.  However, in many cases it is
> > not.  Vegas will end up losing when competing against regular Reno-ish
> > congestion control.  Vegas also has issues with timer granularity, and
> > tuning its parameters can be quite tricky.  There are a number of unusual
> > failure modes as well, such as responding to congestion on the reverse
> > path, or caused by cross traffic.
>
> It would be better to make it a per route flag than a global sysctl
> at least.

This makes sense to me.  One of the primary uses of Vegas I see in high
performance networking is as a work-around for grossly overbuffered
routers.  This give the right level of control for that purpose.

  -John


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>