it tends to cause an immediate loss on the first window of data
> >> because of the overload at the switch or the receiver.
> >>
> >>cheers
> >>luigi
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Hi folks,
> >> >
> >> > A
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Jonathan Lemon wrote:
>> Actually, you could argue that both should be changed to
>> 2-3 segments, see http://www.aciri.org/floyd/tcp_init_win.html
>
>To play with this setting, does this (in /etc/sysctl.conf) do the trick? Or
>does anything
Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> Actually, you could argue that both should be changed to
> 2-3 segments, see http://www.aciri.org/floyd/tcp_init_win.html
To play with this setting, does this (in /etc/sysctl.conf) do the trick? Or
does anything else need to be changed?
net.inet.tcp.slowstart_flightsize=2
one, in many nets including a 100/10 switch, or slow receivers,
>> it tends to cause an immediate loss on the first window of data
>> because of the overload at the switch or the receiver.
>>
>> cheers
>> luigi
>>
>> >
>> > Hi folks,
&g
gt; Hi folks,
> >
> > At the last IETF meeting there were some debates around FreeBSD using a
> > 16-KB initial congestion window in TCP when destination IP address is from
> > the local subnet. Does anybody remember when it was introduced into the
> > code and what k
sing a
> 16-KB initial congestion window in TCP when destination IP address is from
> the local subnet. Does anybody remember when it was introduced into the
> code and what kind of ideas were behind?
>
> Some reasons were given why it may not be a good idea:
>
> -the benefit of
Hi folks,
At the last IETF meeting there were some debates around FreeBSD using a
16-KB initial congestion window in TCP when destination IP address is from
the local subnet. Does anybody remember when it was introduced into the
code and what kind of ideas were behind?
Some reasons were given
