Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*packet\s+reordering\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*packet\s+reordering\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. packet reordering (score: 1): Author: bert hubert <ahu@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 18:54:19 +0200; Hi everybody, In the course of working on the Linux Advanced Routing & Shaping HOWTO (http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing), I discovered something, which lead me to writing this: ++++ Caveats (...) FIXME: the; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00079.html (8,076 bytes)
2. Re: packet reordering (score: 1): Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 23:19:16 +0400 (MSK DST); It does not really, provided this tcp/ip is linux-2.4 tcp/ip. 8)8) Yes, of course, it is problem. That's why I did not recommend to use per-packet balancing and to use multipath routes instead, when; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00083.html (8,763 bytes)
3. Re: packet reordering (score: 1): Author: bert hubert <ahu@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 23:31:10 +0200; For people who want to speed up single tcp/ip sessions, it's not possible. I have noted in the HOWTO however that Linux is 'smart' about this reordering. Ok. It may not be generally useful, true. How; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00084.html (9,599 bytes)
4. Re: packet reordering (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 20:27:34 -0400 (EDT); Probably _the only OS today_ with these features, thanks to the good work by Alexey. Actually it can be done at the ingress qdisc; i just question its usefulness. Infact devik@xxxxxxxxxxxxx had a pat; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00086.html (10,170 bytes)
5. packet reordering (score: 1): Author: bert hubert <ahu@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 18:54:19 +0200; Hi everybody, In the course of working on the Linux Advanced Routing & Shaping HOWTO (http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing), I discovered something, which lead me to writing this: ++++ Caveats (...) FIXME: the; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00226.html (8,091 bytes)
6. Re: packet reordering (score: 1): Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 23:19:16 +0400 (MSK DST); Hello! It does not really, provided this tcp/ip is linux-2.4 tcp/ip. 8)8) Yes, of course, it is problem. That's why I did not recommend to use per-packet balancing and to use multipath routes instead; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00230.html (8,791 bytes)
7. Re: packet reordering (score: 1): Author: bert hubert <ahu@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 23:31:10 +0200; For people who want to speed up single tcp/ip sessions, it's not possible. I have noted in the HOWTO however that Linux is 'smart' about this reordering. Ok. It may not be generally useful, true. How; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00231.html (9,727 bytes)
8. Re: packet reordering (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 20:27:34 -0400 (EDT); Probably _the only OS today_ with these features, thanks to the good work by Alexey. Actually it can be done at the ingress qdisc; i just question its usefulness. Infact devik@xxxxxxxxxxxxx had a pat; /archives/netdev/2000-10/msg00233.html (10,199 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]