Re: "TCPv4 bad checksum" errors: a little more debugging

Damon Buckwalter (damon@meta-x.net)
Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:19:42 -0800

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: Problem with 1G RAM"
Previous message: Colin Plumb: "Re: Are people still having fun with psaux and 2.1.12/3x ?"
Maybe in reply to: Jamie Lokier: ""TCPv4 bad checksum" errors: a little more debugging"

Shaw Carruthers wrote:
>
> It is believed that there is a problem with the Ascends that Demon use
> which leads to checksum errors. The Ascends have a fixed buffer of about
> 16k per connected user. If you advertise a large receive window, the
> buffer can overrun and packets get dropped which screws the VJ
> compression. I use a window of 7k which reduces the problem.
>
> Note: the single Ascend buffer has to handle multiple TCP streams to you.
>
> There is also another problem as I get checksum errors with novj, but far
> less often.

This sounds very possible to me, as we use Ascends as well, and I've
been experiencing the same problems. I get lots of RX frame errors on
my PPP connection as well -- this causes/is related to the TCP checksum
errors, yes?

We're using an Ascend MAX 4048 firmware v6.1.7 here, BTW.

/me has found another reason to dislike Ascend, besides the fact that
configuring one is a PITA.

--
damon@meta-x.net -- PGP and GPG public keys at http://meta-x.net/keys/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: Problem with 1G RAM"
Previous message: Colin Plumb: "Re: Are people still having fun with psaux and 2.1.12/3x ?"
Maybe in reply to: Jamie Lokier: ""TCPv4 bad checksum" errors: a little more debugging"