From: "Wael Noureddine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:54:51 -0700
> > You could also tweak the LRO timeout in a similar fashion based upon > > traffic patterns as well. In fact, extremely sophisticated things can > > be done here to deal with the LRO timing as seen on WAN vs. LAN > > streams. > > The accurate statement is "extremely complicated things need to be done here > to deal with the LRO timing as seen on WAN vs. LAN streams". Not to mention > dealing with retransmissions and the dynamics of congestion control. LRO will just stop accumulating when out-of-sequence data arrives. Nothing complicated at all. And that's _EXACTLY_ what we want to happen. We want Linux's TCP loss response algorithms to take care of things, which have been extensively tuned over many many years and gets several orders of magnitude more testing and exposure than any customized stack you guys put onto a network card. The LRO timing is not complicated, the packet limit is simply a linearly increasing value that just makes sure that it's always less than or equal to whatever the congestion window happens to be at that moment. It cares not about the exact value. LRO will work, and it's the negative attitude of the TOE folks that inspires me to want to help out the LRO folks and ignore the TOE mania altogether. - 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
