> Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 19:56:29 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
>
> Right now the low bound is the RTO that is lowbound to 200msec
> itself. If you decrease the lowbound of the rto then also the ato
> will decrease.
>
>And unless you come up with some clever idea, if you implement
>decreasing the RTO lower bound you will crap out completely with all
>BSD'like TCP stacks where this is the smallest resolution of their TCP
>timers. Read the commentary in tcp_input.c about "HZ/5" etc.
I see the problem with BSD stacks in decreasing the low-bound of the RTO.
I agree with Josip that 200msec is an high number. But really I am not too
much worried about the RTO lowbound since the fast-retrans should avoid me
to lose performances even if the rto timeout won't expire very shortly.
My point is that the BSD issue has _nothing_ to do with the low-bound of
the linux-_ato_ (that right now as side effect of the rto-lowbound is
forced to be lowbound to 200msec too).
Andrea Arcangeli
-
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/