From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:25:32 +0200 (EET)
> Before preparing the submittable spurious RTO responses patch, I would
> like to know what is the preferred style for the response selector code
> (I'm controlling the response through frto_response sysctl)?
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, David Miller wrote:
> If you have any further bug fixes or enhancements to FRTO we
> can put it there too.
I tried the rate-halving approach in spurious RTO response and it looks
really nice indeed. I'll try to also run couple of tests with the
undo_cwr(,1) response too in
From: Ilpo Järvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 22:25:48 +0200
> Here is a set of patches that fixes most of the flaws the current FRTO
> implementation (specified in RFC4138) has, besides that, the last two
> patches add SACK-enhanced FRTO (not enabled unless frto sysctl is set
> t
Hi,
Here is a set of patches that fix most of the flaws the current FRTO
implementation (specified in RFC4138) has, besides that, the last two
patches add SACK-enhanced FRTO (not enabled unless frto sysctl is set
to 2, which allows using of the basic version also with SACK). There
are some depenci
