lwip-users archive search

Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ nagle: 244 ]

Total 244 documents matching your query.

181. [lwip-users] Delayed Ack causing problems? Where to call tcp_nagle_disable()? (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 18:12:00 +0100
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
/archive/html/lwip-users/2011-08/msg00039.html (7,152 bytes)

182. RE: [lwip-users] tcp_write() errors on snd_queuelen (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:27:35 +0000
Thanks for your reply. I am using lwip 1.3.2 version. I just compared the version with 1.4.0 and I see there are many changes. I will look into the option of upgrading but it would be nice to know if
/archive/html/lwip-users/2011-03/msg00062.html (10,986 bytes)

183. Re: [lwip-users] tcp_write() errors on snd_queuelen (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:49:46 +0000
Packets are added to the send queue whenever the application calls send. Packets are removed from the send queue whenever the stack is able to send them; there are lots of factors that limit this for
/archive/html/lwip-users/2011-03/msg00061.html (8,502 bytes)

184. [lwip-users] RTO issues (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:44:44 -0500
No, it is not the combination of lwip and FreeRTOS that caused the RTO issue. When I changed TCP_SND_BUF to 30000 on Nov 23, it should have worked, but somehow, AVR32 2.1's project management didn't
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-12/msg00096.html (4,758 bytes)

185. [lwip-users] One more context of execution question (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 18:30:18 -0500
I have one more question about what is safe to run in different execution context for lwip (interrupt/thread). I did add an OS to my application and now moved some things around so data is only sent
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-12/msg00058.html (5,433 bytes)

186. Re: [lwip-users] Can I tune the retransmit configuration? (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:36:28 +0000
In part, yes. lwIP will keep transmitting as long as it is allowed to by TCP. There are three things that control this: 1) The advertised receive window by the receiver, and how much has been used al
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-11/msg00087.html (5,593 bytes)

187. Re: [lwip-users] lwIP hangs on transfers with many short packets (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 21:45:38 +0200
multiplex wrote: Yes, that was my impression. I tried increasing it by a factor of ten, but then nothing came out until I turned of Nagle. Then, it still disappeared into never never land. tcp_output
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-05/msg00102.html (7,491 bytes)

188. Re: [lwip-users] lwIP hangs on transfers with many short packets (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 11:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
Yes, that was my impression. I tried increasing it by a factor of ten, but then nothing came out until I turned of Nagle. Then, it still disappeared into never never land. tcp_output reporting: nothi
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-05/msg00101.html (6,891 bytes)

189. Re: [lwip-users] tcp_output does not flush (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 14:56:32 +0100
With TCP fundamentally you can't. You can disable Nagle's algorithm if you wish (by setting the NODELAY flag on the pcb->flags) but it's a good idea to read up on this before doing so so you understa
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-05/msg00018.html (4,771 bytes)

190. [lwip-users] tcp_output does not flush (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 09:45:11 -0400
I am using LWIP 1.3.2 via the raw API in a single-threaded environment. In a specific example, a call to tcp_write() enqueues two segments. Successive calls to tcp_output() flush the first segment an
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-05/msg00016.html (6,048 bytes)

191. [lwip-users] HTTP server help needed (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 09:30:45 +0200
Hi, I need some help setting up an http server, since you 've got it working. First, have you used http files from /contrib folder? Second, did you make a special thread for it, or does it use tcpip_
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-04/msg00011.html (8,410 bytes)

192. [lwip-users] lwIP malloc fail (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:38:19 -0300
Hi all! I'm having a problem in trying to make a system with lwIP that sends a large file with TCP from an external serial Flash memory. I use the following logic: read certain amont of data from the
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-04/msg00008.html (8,022 bytes)

193. [lwip-users] Web browser waits 200ms before ACK (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:03:33 +0100
Hi, I have a web server (Luminary Micro contrib module with SSI and CGI). The page content is sent in few parts. When server sends a part, web browser waits 200ms before sending ACK. I think there is
/archive/html/lwip-users/2010-02/msg00035.html (4,774 bytes)

194. [lwip-users] Re: A question about the LwIP stats (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 14:28 +0100, Kieran Mansley wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 06:11 -0700, Niels Hendriks wrote: >> I assumed that when the callback function gets called (i.e. data is >> received
/archive/html/lwip-users/2009-06/msg00131.html (5,469 bytes)

195. Re: [lwip-users] A question about the LwIP stats (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:28:06 +0100
The tcp.recv counter is incremented for each received packet. This may include packets that are not destined for your application. The stack may also combine multiple received packets into one call t
/archive/html/lwip-users/2009-06/msg00122.html (5,006 bytes)

196. Re: [lwip-users] about lwip TCP/IP paratmers (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:28:19 +0800
thanks Kierean, I check the code, and I understand lwIP really send FIN in socket close. I have a quertion for how long time will be lwIP resend the lost pacakge? ## No. Time Source Destination Proto
/archive/html/lwip-users/2009-03/msg00156.html (21,972 bytes)

197. RE: [lwip-users] Re: lwip-users Digest, Vol 67, Issue 6 (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:22:48 -0500
I’ve spent about a month optimizing TCP bandwidth for transmitting while doing other parts of my application. All of the following improve bandwidth in approximate order of amount of improvemen
/archive/html/lwip-users/2009-03/msg00028.html (10,572 bytes)

198. Re: [lwip-users] netconn_write throughput stuck at 1024 bytes (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:27:20 +0100
The parameters you want to tweak mainly influend throughput of streaming data, i.e. the stack on your side is fast enough to fill the tcp window. If so, increasing the three parameters you stated bel
/archive/html/lwip-users/2009-01/msg00062.html (13,290 bytes)

199. Re: [lwip-users] Slow sending speed (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:09:23 +0000
Sounds like bad interaction between the Nagle algorithm on the sender and the delayed ACK algorithm on the receiver. Kieran
/archive/html/lwip-users/2008-12/msg00122.html (4,870 bytes)

200. Re: [lwip-users] question about netconn_write (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:59:53 +0800
Thanks Based on your suggtion, I tried to add a lwip_tcpflush(int s) int lwip_tcpflush(int s) { struct lwip_socket *sock; sock = get_socket(s); if (!sock) return -1; return tcp_output(sock->conn.pcb.
/archive/html/lwip-users/2008-12/msg00081.html (7,597 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu