--Original Message-- It worked but I noticed a relatively big latency (about 200ms or more) between arrival of buf_n and buf_n+1. Where does it come from? How lwip stack schedule an actual transmissi
lwip 1.4.1. Bare metal on an ARM STM32F417. Using raw TCP calls. Device IP (obtained from DHCP) is 192.168.9.2, and it connects to server software running on an Ubuntu VM at 192.168.9.250 (which work
Hi, Yet another ACK problem. I've read many of the topics around ACK behaviour, but have not been able to resolve my problem. Hopefully someone can help. Device setup lwip 1.4.1. Bare metal on an ARM
Hi Bill, Certainly, I can show my code. But I think that I set up the server successfully. My problem is how to send packets immediatly(when I turn off the nagle.) The "tcp_output()" is in the last l
Hi, I do not see all your code so it is a problem understanding. Are you aware that when you create a TCP server you get one PCB (the listening PCB) and a different PCB for connection... they are dif
Hi all It is probably a logical explanation for the behavior I see with different TCP_MSS settings. Hope some one can explain me why. Our device is communicating with our server with TCP. It is a cla
My problem is that every outgoing Message, when writing 26bit data to tcp_write and tcp_output, has in the end four data-packets as payload, therefore 104bits, but i want to send every 50ms one singl
Hi Artem I have looked at the thread and some further questions regarding you guide: 2. Make sure your sys arch protection implementation does taskDISABLE_INTERRUPTS/taskENABLE_INTERRUPTS (or portXXX
Simon, thanks for your reply. is setsockopt( sock, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, (char *)&flag, sizeof(flag) ) the same as tcp_nagle_disable(myconn-> pcb.tcp )? I already have tcp_nagle_disable(myconn->
It is efficient as it is, as it uses less header bytes per data byte when combining multiple 200-byte-chunks into one 1400-byte-packet. Note that this is only done when there is un-ACKed data - this
I have verified that my MAC is dropping the tx frames during the "dead time". Today I put some debug output into my low_level_output() and lwIP is passing it in the frames, they are just not making i
That's OK with me, I only wanted to point out that the httpd does *not* need nagle to be disabled, it's fast with it enabled and doesn't gain anything from disabling it. As the defaults for the mbox
HI, Hans Thanks for you recommends. But even after I searched the user list, I still not found an answer. My question is just simple: 1. What's the public interface (the real public function list) of
Hi I recommend you to browse through the old mailings within this mailing list. Some of mine date back to 2007. The keywords you have to use for your search are ppp, nosys (perhaps no_sys) and/or add
has it." I finally debugged this issue and solved it by set TF_FIN flag on the pcb in function tcp_send_fin() in the case where we have unsent segments. I wanted to make a bug report but I realized
you capture False alert for the FIN ! The flag is set but it's not displayed in wireshark single line because it's interpreted as an HTTP response. m8847 you should check in the packet details. I st
Hi, lwIP V1.4.0. I have moved the demo FreeRTOS example from the Windoze simulator onto real hardware in order to check the timing behaviour (which can't really be done in the simulator), and found a
I think I have answered my own question. I put it before these lines, and everything is fine now. /* Tell TCP that this is the structure we wish to be passed for our callbacks. */ tcp_nagle_disable(p