I'm somewhat sympathetic to the purity of TCP. Nevertheless...
On 02/10/2013 16:05, Kevin Oberman wrote:
[..]
What I would like to see is a way to have it available, but make it
unlikely to be enabled except in a way that would put up flashing red
warnings and sound sirens to warn people that it is very dangerous and
can be a way to blow off a few of one's own toes.
+1
I rather doubt the Internet will be crushed by adding a non-default
option that allows FreeBSD TCP to behave More Aggressively Than It
Really Should(tm) under certain circumstances.
I'm certainly not denying that the sky would likely fall if everyone
turned on John's proposed socket option all the time. (Such might
also be said of allowing UDP applications to be free of any CC at
all, or allowing new TCP CC algorithms that deviate from the prevalent
norm.) But I think that FreeBSD benefits from adding more special-case
knobs for the cognoscenti to twiddle, on the basis that most end-users
wont bother.
One idea that popped into my head (and may be completely ridiculous,
is to make its availability dependent on a kernel option and have
warning in NOTES about it contravening normal and accepted practice
and that it can cause serious problems both for yourself and for
others using the network.
Perhaps also require a sysctl to be set before John's per-socket
TCP_IGNOREIDLE option has any effect. (Thus requiring a sending host's
administrator to at least be complicit in enabling any subsequent
ruination of their nearest bottleneck.)
cheers,
gja
_______________________________________________
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"
