On Friday 29 October 2004 13:00, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
>
> Sridhar Samudrala <sri@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > This looks like the same TCP window overflow problem in 2.6.7
> > that came up a couple of days back.
> >
> > See the thread
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=109887532400001&r=1&w=2
> > and the patch posted by davem.
>
> Yes, and BTW for the original poster, BIC only effects sender
> behavior whereas in your test case the Linux system with BIC
> enabled is the receiver.
That's a good point. I was concerned that it might be
playing a role in what window size got sent back to
the sending machine. Glad to hear it's not a worry.
BTW - any idea if tcp_bic would be easily modified
to be configurable on a per interface basis? We typically
have a 100Mb interface on a LAN; and another 100Mb
interface going out to a WAN (DS3 or E3).
We're using tcp_bic to get near 95+% utilization of the
WAN connection; but I don't think we need it on the LAN,
and in some situations it may interfere... or, is this not
a concern? Thanks again all.
Sridhar,
thank's for the pointer.
I'll be updating to 2.6.9 and will let you know the
results of my testing.
-Dan
--
Dan A. Dickey
dan.dickey@xxxxxxxxxx
SAVVIS
Transforming Information Technology
|