[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled
From: |
Kieran Mansley |
Subject: |
Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:02:28 +0100 |
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:18 +1300, David Empson wrote:
> Kieran Mansley wrote:
> > I was a bit wrong there. I've taken another look at the code and this
> > change in behaviour is intentional. There were two changes in 1.3.1:
> > - only send an explicit window update if the change is greater than
> > TCP_WND_UPDATE_THRESHOLD.
> > - only change the window advertised (including in normal ACKs) if the
> > change is greater than 1 MSS. This is silly window avoidance, and
> > designed to prevent the sender getting small amounts of window and then
> > sending small packets.
>
> The description of silly window avoidance in RFC1122 (section 4.2.3.3) says
> that there is supposed to be a second test.
>
> The threshold to advertise an increase in window size should be the lesser
> of MSS and WND/2 (assuming the recommended fraction of 1/2).
Sounds like a good change. Could you file a bug for this?
Kieran
- RE: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, (continued)
- Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, Kieran Mansley, 2009/10/21
- RE: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, David Shmelzer, 2009/10/21
- Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, address@hidden, 2009/10/21
- RE: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, David Shmelzer, 2009/10/21
- Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, Kieran Mansley, 2009/10/22
- Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, David Empson, 2009/10/21
- Re: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, Simon Goldschmidt, 2009/10/22
- Re: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, Kieran Mansley, 2009/10/22
- Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled,
Kieran Mansley <=
- Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP payload is doubled, David Empson, 2009/10/22