From: "Wael Noureddine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TCP Offload (TOE) - Chelsio
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 21:37:07 -0700
> > The is no RFC violated by being "bursty". Show me the RFC where TCP
> > burstiness is "standardized". This is yet another strawman.
>
> You surely know this is a recurring theme in all congestion control RFCs
> (RFC2581 in particular),
Now I can take you even less seriously. In RFC2581, they are talking
about unloading a burst of data into a connection where there has been
significant idle time since the most recent data send.
> as well as in the "Known TCP Implementation Problems" RFC2525.
In this RFC bursts are only mentioned in:
2.1: this is talking about lack of any slow start at all
2.3: this is talking about an uninitialized congestion window
at connection startup
2.8: failure of window deflation after loss recovery
2.13: stretch ACK violation, which is discussing receiver behavior
None of any of these RFCs discussing bursting are talking about a
properly inflated congestion window, during an active and healthy
transfer. LSO violates no RFC standard whatsoever.
In short, you've brought several strawmen in an attempt to discredit
stateless offloading as not being standards compliant. If you truly
believe what you say, then please go ask SPEC to invalidate most of
the current SpecWEB benchmark results because the vast majority of
them are using LSO.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
