Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 20:44:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tcp question. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0209202042550.21069-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20020920221735.Q6684-100000@patrocles.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > 000221 C.ssh > B.916: . [tcp sum ok] ack 66194 win 24624 > > nop,nop,timestamp 259781842 16260556> (DF) > > (ttl 64, id 18252, len 52) > > **why wait here**? > > 003030 C.ssh > B.916: . [tcp sum ok] ack 68930 win 24624 > > nop,nop,timestamp 259781842 16260556> (DF) > > (ttl 64, id 18253, len 52) > > Ok, I now have a more constructive reply. (Having reread with an > understanding of the timestamps... I hadn't used -ttt before.) > > tcp_output.c rev 1.53 sounds like it may be applicable to this case: > > Add a flag TF_LASTIDLE, that forces a previously idle connection > to send all its data, especially when the data is less than one MSS. > This fixes an issue where the stack was delaying the sending > of data, eventhough there was enough window to send all the data and > the sending of data was emptying the socket buffer. > > Problem found by Yoshihiro Tsuchiya (tsuchiya@flab.fujitsu.co.jp) > > Submitted by: Jayanth Vijayaraghavan > > Apply that to host B and see if it helps. Wow.. that certainly sounds liek it might apply.. (though why it wasn't a problem with the othe rsession I don't know.) l'll try that for certain > > Mike "Silby" Silbersack > > > 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.4.21.0209202042550.21069-100000>