kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:
> > And why (1) is a problem is precisely what I don't understand. Nagle is
> > *supposed* to prevent you from sending multiple remnants.
>
> It is not supposed to delay between sends for delack timeout.
> Nagle did not know about brain damages which his great idea
> will cause when used together with delaying acks. :-)
Well, I think this "problem" is way overstated. With a low latency path
the delay ack estimator should already take care of this. With a high
latency path you're out of luck in any case.
Besides, as I said, you can always disable Nagle in an interactive
application. I suppose it would be nice to have a socket option to
disable delayack as well, just for completeness.
> > is acked. This can be solved using an idea from Greg Minshall, which I
> > thought was quite cool.
>
> It is approach used in 2.4. :-)
Cool. :)
> It does help when sender is also linux-2.4. :-)
>
> Alexey
Regards,
MikaL
-
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