> Danny Braniss wrote: > > hi, > > im running some experiments, and it seems to me that > > setting net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 has the reverse effect. > > with sysctl net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 = 0, the transaction uses only 6 packets > > and it's less than 1 sec, setting net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 to 1 uses > > 8 packets and takes more than 1 sec. > > The first tcp session in an TTCP connection doesn't gain anything, only > subsequent session can go faster. >
i have tried many. ( > 1), btw, your statement and what my reading of Stevens don't 'coincide' :-), but then my experiment is not working either. > You see in the second case that it tries to send data in the packet which > is not ACKed for the first connection and has to be retransmitted. > > You should check out the second and third connection to the server and > look how they behave. > > Did you enable rfc1644 on server and client? yes! what puzzels me is that with rfc1644 on on both ends it's slower than without it. from Colin's answer i assume that my client is doing the right thing, the server is not. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
