From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 8 14:11:24 2005 Return-Path: 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 1674316A4CE for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 14:11:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from casselton.net (casselton.net [63.165.140.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9180F43D39 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 14:11:23 +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 j28EB155001185; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 08:11:01 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net) Received: (from tinguely@localhost) by casselton.net (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j28EB0Hv001184; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 08:11:00 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tinguely) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 08:11:00 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Tinguely Message-Id: <200503081411.j28EB0Hv001184@casselton.net> To: daniel@benzedrine.cx, spork@fasttrackmonkey.com In-Reply-To: <20050308101633.GC26999@insomnia.benzedrine.cx> 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:11:24 -0000 Basing from what I see in Daniel Hartmeier analysis of tcpdump (I honestly did not look at the original, when is has been summerized so conveniently): The server is not telling the client that a packet has been lost. The first two ACKs are correct duplicate ACKs, but the remaining ACKs coming from he server have window adjustments, so the client does not treat them as duplicate ACKs coming from a packet loss. --Mark Tinguely