Re: [PATCH] tcp: Implement a two-level initial RTO as per draft RFC 2988bis-02.

[tsuna]

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Alexander Zimmermann
<alexander.zimmermann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If you set the initRTO=0.1s, it's good for me but bad for the rest of the
> world. That's the difference.
>
> Or do you want to implement a lower barrier of 1sec so that you can ensure
> that nobody set the initRTO lower than 1s?

Oh, I see.  Yes, there is a lower bound (and an upper bound) on what
values the kernel will accept as initRTO.  In the patch "Implement a
two-level initial RTO as per draft RFC 2988bis-02" above, I re-used
TCP_RTO_MIN and TCP_RTO_MAX in net/ipv4/sysctl_net_ipv4.c in order to
prevent users from setting a minRTO that's outside this range.  They
are defined as follows in tcp.h:

#define TCP_RTO_MAX     ((unsigned)(120*HZ))
#define TCP_RTO_MIN     ((unsigned)(HZ/5))

So we're talking about a [200ms ; 120s] range no matter what.

-- 
Benoit "tsuna" Sigoure
Software Engineer @ www.StumbleUpon.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/