Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 14:39:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> Cc: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>, net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Retransmit times (was something else) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0207181436170.84569-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200207182133.g6ILXHNl007758@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
and now that we are on -net....... TADA!!! SACK is now supported by default on 90% of internet hosts except for "guess who?" SACK is the way that most internet traffic is now handling packet loss. Isn't it about time that one of the (3?) SACK implementations got integrated? On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote: > [Trying desparately to move this discussion to the correct list....] > > > - He notes that Microsoft's TCP had a serious problem wherein it would > slow-retransmit too aggressively, which resulted in almost any network > transient triggering sufficient dupacks to cause fast retransmit to > engage. (The result was that every data packet would be sent twice.) > He suggests that, to avoid this, it may be necessary to lengthen the > slow-retransmit timeout after a fast retransmit is triggered. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0207181436170.84569-100000>