On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, John Heffner wrote: > Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > > ...Mind if I ask another similar one, any idea why prior_ssthresh is smaller > > (3/4 of it) than cwnd used to be (see tcp_current_ssthresh)? > > Not sure on that one. I'm not aware of any publications this is based on.
My theory is that it could relate to tcp_cwnd_restart and tcp_cwnd_application_limited using it and the others are just then accidently changed as well. Perhaps I'll have to dig once again to changelog history to see if there's some clue (unless Alexey shed some light to this)... > Maybe Alexey knows? Added Alexey. -- i.
