From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar  9 13:51:20 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC48A16A4CE
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed,  9 Mar 2005 13:51:20 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from casselton.net (casselton.net [63.165.140.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 475CC43D5F
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed,  9 Mar 2005 13:51:20 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
Received: from casselton.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by casselton.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j29Dp4sL096492;
	Wed, 9 Mar 2005 07:51:04 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
Received: (from tinguely@localhost)
	by casselton.net (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j29Dp4Kw096491;
	Wed, 9 Mar 2005 07:51:04 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from tinguely)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 07:51:04 -0600 (CST)
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@casselton.net>
Message-Id: <200503091351.j29Dp4Kw096491@casselton.net>
To: daniel@benzedrine.cx, spork@fasttrackmonkey.com
In-Reply-To: <D86BF562467D944EB435513F725B236A07C1D7@exchange.stardevelopers4msi.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=REPLY_TO_EMPTY autolearn=no 
	version=3.0.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on ccn.casselton.net
cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: FreeBSD 4.x and OS-X tcp performance
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:51:20 -0000


Thinking about the trace a little more, the Apple send buffer must be set
much lower (about 18-19KB ballpark) than the FreeBSD recieve buffer (56 KB).
If these settings were simular, the Apple machine should be providing
more data as the FreeBSD gives the window updates - this would give
the FreeBSD side more chances to give duplicate ACKs to recover quicker.

For related curiousities, would you tell me if the FreeBSD a Uniprocessor
or multiprocessor?

--Mark Tinguely.