Hello!
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 02:13:53PM +1100, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/13/10 00:18, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> > On 11/12/10 21:41, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:21:29PM +1100, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> >>> On 11/12/10 20:44, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/
On 11/13/10 00:18, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/12/10 21:41, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:21:29PM +1100, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
>>> On 11/12/10 20:44, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
On 11/07/10 17:32, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/03/10 09:30, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 11/12/10 21:41, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:21:29PM +1100, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
>> On 11/12/10 20:44, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
>>> On 11/07/10 17:32, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
On 11/03/10 09:30, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 02.11.2010 01:11, Maxim Dounin wrote:
>>
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:21:29PM +1100, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/12/10 20:44, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> > On 11/07/10 17:32, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> >> On 11/03/10 09:30, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> >>> On 02.11.2010 01:11, Maxim Dounin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 201
On 11/12/10 20:44, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/07/10 17:32, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
>> On 11/03/10 09:30, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>> On 02.11.2010 01:11, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:17:59PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 27.09.2010 10:12, Ma
On 11/07/10 17:32, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 11/03/10 09:30, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>> On 02.11.2010 01:11, Maxim Dounin wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:17:59PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>>
On 27.09.2010 10:12, Maxim Dounin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Mon, S
On 11/03/10 09:30, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 02.11.2010 01:11, Maxim Dounin wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:17:59PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>
>>> On 27.09.2010 10:12, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:24:53PM +0400, Maxim Dounin wrote:
>
On 02.11.2010 01:11, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:17:59PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 27.09.2010 10:12, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:24:53PM +0400, Maxim Dounin wrote:
[...]
Andre, could you please take a look at one more patch as wel
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:17:59PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 27.09.2010 10:12, Maxim Dounin wrote:
> >Hello!
> >
> >On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:24:53PM +0400, Maxim Dounin wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>Andre, could you please take a look at one more patch as well?
> >>
> >>Igor repor
On 27.09.2010 10:12, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:24:53PM +0400, Maxim Dounin wrote:
[...]
Andre, could you please take a look at one more patch as well?
Igor reported that it still sees 100ms delays with rfc3465 turned
on, and it turns out to be similar issue (setti
Hello!
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:24:53PM +0400, Maxim Dounin wrote:
[...]
> Andre, could you please take a look at one more patch as well?
>
> Igor reported that it still sees 100ms delays with rfc3465 turned
> on, and it turns out to be similar issue (setting cwnd to 1*MSS)
> for hosts foun
Hello!
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:56:40AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 13.07.2010 16:01, Maxim Dounin wrote:
> >On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:47:02PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> >
> >>It seems that net.inet.tcp.slowstart_flightsize does not work in 8-STABLE.
> >>For a long time I used slowstar
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 06.08.2010 11:00, Charles Logan wrote:
>>
>> Sorry but this is not a bug. You set bad sysctl flags.
>
> Care to explain in more detail? For example which sysctl flag was set
> wrong?
>
>> We won't add it to our database and this is the
On 06.08.2010 11:00, Charles Logan wrote:
Sorry but this is not a bug. You set bad sysctl flags.
Care to explain in more detail? For example which sysctl flag was set wrong?
We won't add it to our database and this is the final decison.
Which database?
Regards,
Freebsd Team
Which team?
Sorry but this is not a bug. You set bad sysctl flags.
We won't add it to our database and this is the final decison.
Regards,
Freebsd Team
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 13.07.2010 16:01, Maxim Dounin wrote:
>>
>> Hello!
>>
>> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:47:02PM +0
On 13.07.2010 16:01, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:47:02PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
It seems that net.inet.tcp.slowstart_flightsize does not work in 8-STABLE.
For a long time I used slowstart_flightsize=2 on FreeBSD 4, 6, and 7 hosts.
However, FreeBSD-8 always starts w
On 13.07.2010 16:01, Maxim Dounin wrote:
Hello!
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:47:02PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
It seems that net.inet.tcp.slowstart_flightsize does not work in 8-STABLE.
For a long time I used slowstart_flightsize=2 on FreeBSD 4, 6, and 7 hosts.
However, FreeBSD-8 always starts w
Hello!
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:47:02PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> It seems that net.inet.tcp.slowstart_flightsize does not work in 8-STABLE.
> For a long time I used slowstart_flightsize=2 on FreeBSD 4, 6, and 7 hosts.
> However, FreeBSD-8 always starts with the single packet.
> I saw this on
Hi Igor,
I'm sorry I missed this way back when you sent it.
On 05/12/10 22:47, Igor Sysoev wrote:
It seems that net.inet.tcp.slowstart_flightsize does not work in 8-STABLE.
For a long time I used slowstart_flightsize=2 on FreeBSD 4, 6, and 7 hosts.
However, FreeBSD-8 always starts with the sing
19 matches
Mail list logo