lstewart added a comment.
In https://reviews.freebsd.org/D5872#128556, @hiren wrote: > In https://reviews.freebsd.org/D5872#128555, @lstewart wrote: > > > I thought that had been fixed ages ago... oops. > > > Fixed? i.e. doing something other than setting cwnd to 1 seg? Yes, but turns out it was a discussion I had privately with a colleague who never got around to creating the patch we discussed. >> It should be calling cc_cong_signal() with a new congestion type. > > Hum... tcp_quench() used to be there which essentially had this 1 line to set cwnd to 1 seg. > > Is there any (RFC) guidance for what to do in this situation? No, and it's an implementation detail that RFCs have no real business being concerned with either. Setting cwnd==maxseg is completely inappropriate though and I would argue that whatever reasoning was used to justify the original choice is as wrong today as it was back then. At any rate, that's something to follow up separately. REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D5872 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: sepherosa_gmail.com, network, glebius, adrian, delphij, decui_microsoft.com, honzhan_microsoft.com, howard0su_gmail.com, freebsd-net-list, transport, jtl, hiren, lstewart Cc: gnn, mike-karels.net, jtl _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
