Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      26 Mar 1999 08:56:25 -0600
From:      Dave Marquardt <marquard@austin.ibm.com>
To:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: mbuf clusters and socket send buffers (was Re: 3.1-STABLE dies on 40+ connects)
Message-ID:  <v5td81wfgfa.fsf@mojave.austin.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: Jim Shankland's message of "Thu, 25 Mar 1999 16:54:16 -0800 (PST)"
References:  <199903260054.QAA22060@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com> writes:
> A thought related to this discussion:  does it make sense to allow the
> send buffers to be larger than the peer's advertised window size?
> In other words, why "preposition" those bytes in the kernel before
> the peer has indicated a willingness to accept them?

Yes, it absolutely makes sense.  Let's say you send everything the
receiver allows you to send.  If your socket send buffer has unsent
data in it, then when the receiver ACKs, TCP can start sending right
away.  If you don't have more data in the socket send buffer, you have
to wake up the application and copy more data in from it.

So, in other words, having a larger send buffer allows streaming.

-Dave


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?v5td81wfgfa.fsf>