Hello!
> > But sending ACK on buffer drain at least for short
> > packets is real demand, which cannot be relaxed.
>
> Why? This one has me stumped.
To remove sick delays with nagling transfers (1) and to remove
deadlocks due to starvation on rcvbuf (2) at receiver and on sndbuf
at sender (3).
Actually, (2) is solved nowadays with compressing queue. (3) can be solved
acking each other segment. But (1) remains. The solution used in 2.2,
when delack timeout was reduced to short value on short packets with PSH
set worked with probability of 50% on very slow links i.e. in the case
when wrong delay is not important at all and not covering cases
where absence of long gaps is really important.
Actually, any alternative idea how to solve this could be very useful.
Alexey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 21:00:55 EST