Re: http.us rotation Was: PGI installer ISO image (BETA) for woody now available
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 06:18:13PM -0500, Scott Dier wrote:
> >I increased the default wmem values (the second two numbers) by a factor of
> >two on the sending machine, and he gradually increased the rmem values up
> I would be careful changing the default window size much, if your side
> sends too much before ACK's are required there can easily be a DOS of a
> small link. (or something like that) I've seen a T1 flooded by this
> before, it isn't pretty. Lots of packets hit the floor on the providers
Surely if you change the _size_ of packets, their number decreases, not
increases? The real problem, I would think, would be with clients to which
there is much less latency -- compared to the defaults, they would get
larger packets in the same small number of ms, which could then become a
problem if they've got a TCP/IP implementation incapable of handling this.
I'm also told that if a machine's got insufficient RAM, it would be unable
to handle huge window sizes.
Anyway, of all the network problems out there, I've yet to hear a user
complaining about this one... :)
> Maximum window sizes and relying on hosts to be cool enough to say
> "gimmie more!" is much safer at the moment.
In that context, ITYM minimum.
The problem with the default value is that even if the remote side had rmem
increased, there was no increase in throughput unless I increased wmem.
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org