From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru
To: Mika.Liljeberg@welho.com (Mika Liljeberg)
Cc: ak@muc.de, davem@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TCP acking too fast
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 22:20:24 +0400 (MSK DST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200110141820.WAA06484@ms2.inr.ac.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3BC9D1BB.3177FA39@welho.com> from "Mika Liljeberg" at Oct 14, 1 08:56:11 pm
Hello!
> The assumption is that the peer is implemented the way you expect and
> that the application doesn't toy with TCP_NODELAY.
Sorry??
It is the most important _exactly_ for TCP_NODELAY, which
generates lots of remnants.
> Not really. You could do one of two things: either ack every second
> segment
I do not worry about this _at_ _all_. See?
"each other", "each two mss" --- all this is red herring.
I do understand your problem, which is not related to rcv_mss.
When bandwidth in different directions differ more than 20 times,
stretch ACKs are even preferred. Look into tcplw work, using stretch ACKs
is even considered as something normal.
I really commiserate and think that removing "final cut" clause
will help you. But sending ACK on buffer drain at least for short
packets is real demand, which cannot be relaxed.
"final cut" is also better not to remove actually, but the case
when it is required is probabilistically marginal.
Alexey
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-14 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-14 0:23 Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 6:40 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 7:05 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 7:47 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 7:51 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 8:12 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 8:39 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 9:03 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 9:15 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 9:16 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 9:25 ` Andi Kleen
2001-10-14 9:39 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 11:30 ` Andi Kleen
2001-10-14 11:49 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 14:05 ` Andi Kleen
2001-10-14 14:26 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 16:12 ` Andi Kleen
2001-10-14 16:55 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 17:07 ` kuznet
2001-10-14 17:26 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 17:35 ` kuznet
2001-10-14 17:56 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 18:20 ` kuznet [this message]
2001-10-14 18:48 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 19:12 ` kuznet
2001-10-14 19:32 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 19:40 ` kuznet
2001-10-14 20:06 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-15 18:40 ` kuznet
2001-10-15 19:15 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-15 19:38 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 13:14 ` [PATCH] " Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-14 16:36 ` kuznet
2001-10-14 7:50 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-14 7:53 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-15 20:59 ` Bill Davidsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200110141820.WAA06484@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--to=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=Mika.Liljeberg@welho.com \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®