netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFT] BIC TCP delayed ack compensation

To: "Injong Rhee" <rhee@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFT] BIC TCP delayed ack compensation
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:26:11 -0800
Cc: hubert.tonneau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, cliffw@xxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200502231835.j1NIZX2T020606@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <052Q0TU11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200502231835.j1NIZX2T020606@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:37:35 -0500
"Injong Rhee" <rhee@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hubert Tonneau [mailto:hubert.tonneau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 5:23 PM
> > 2.6.9 to 100 Mbps connected MacOSX: 15 seconds (for roughly 100 MB
> > or data)
> > 2.6.9 to gigabit connected MacOSX: 5 seconds
> > 2.6.10-ac11 to 100 Mbps connected MacOSX: 325 seconds
> > 2.6.10-ac11 to gigabit connected MacOSX: 5 seconds
> > 2.6.10-ac11+BIC to 100 Mbps connected MacOSX: 620 seconds
> > 2.6.10-ac11+BIC to gigabit connected MacOSX: 5 seconds
> 
> Another way to test whether this is related to the os or bic
> implementation is to test it with our bic patch 1.1. + Linux 2.4. It
> will tell whether the original implementation of BIC has something to
> do with the performance with respect to MacOS. 

I don't think BIC has much to do with this problem.  MacOS-X does delayed
ACKs until a PSH is seen and this kills performance if we don't PSH often
enough.

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