From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 May 2001 15:38:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 May 2001 15:38:02 -0400 Received: from ghost.btnet.cz ([62.80.85.74]:22025 "HELO ghost.btnet.cz") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 13 May 2001 15:37:47 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 21:38:53 +0200 From: clock@ghost.btnet.cz To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Linux TCP impotency Message-ID: <20010513213853.A5700@ghost.btnet.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Using 2.2.19 I discovered that running two simultaneous scp's (uses up whole capacity in TCP traffic) on a 115200bps full duplex serial port nullmodem cable causes the earlier started one to survive and the later to starve. Running bcp instead of the second (which uses UDP) at 11000 bytes per second caused the utilization in both directions to go up nearly to 100%. Is this a normal TCP stack behaviour? -- Karel Kulhavy http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~clock