On 30.01.2013 18:11, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 1/30/13 11:58 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 6:07:22 pm Andre Oppermann wrote:
Yes, unfortunately I do object. This option, combined with the inflated
CWND at the end of a burst, effectively removes much, if not all, of the
congestion control mechanisms originally put in place to allow multiple
[TCP] streams co-exist on the same pipe. Not having any decay or timeout
makes it even worse by doing this burst after an arbitrary amount of time
when network conditions and the congestion situation have certainly changed.
You have completely ignored the fact that Linux has had this as a global
option for years and the Internet has not melted. A socket option is far more
fine-grained than their tunable (and requires code changes, not something a
random sysadmin can just toggle as "tuning").
I agree with John here.
While Andre's objection makes sense, since the majority of Linux/Unix hosts now
have this as a
global option I can't think of why you would force FreeBSD to be a final
holdout.
Unless OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris/Ilumos also support this it is hardly a
majority of Linux/Unix hosts. And this isn't something a "sysadmin" should
tune at all.
--
Andre
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
