From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 16 22:49:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 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 149D916A415 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:49:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C02B43D53 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:49:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 38329 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2006 22:41:17 -0000 Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([62.48.2.2]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 16 Nov 2006 22:41:17 -0000 Message-ID: <455CEAE0.1060603@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 23:49:04 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Morgan References: <00f701c709cf$6c371d20$152ea8c0@phobos> In-Reply-To: <00f701c709cf$6c371d20$152ea8c0@phobos> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SV: Automatic TCP send socker buffer sizing X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:49:04 -0000 Morgan wrote: >> This is a patch adding automatic TCP send socket buffer >> sizing. > > > >> The patch is available here: >> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~andre/tcp_auto_sndbuf-20061116.diff >> >> Any testers, especially with busy FTP servers, are very welcome. >> > > > Very nice indeed! I've actually been looking for something like this :-) I > would very much like to try it out but I need to know if I can benefit from > it with my setup. My network knowledge on this deep level is very limited so > I need to ask a few questions that probably sounds stupid... but here we go: > > Would this patch only benefit traffic generated from or destined to the > FreeBSD box itself or would it also benefit traffic generated behind it on a > LAN if the FreeBSD box was configured as: > > a) a router with NAT > > b) a router without NAT > > c) a bridge only > > Add to this the extra complexity of pf with synproxy and modulate state. I > simply don't know how (if at all) FreeBSD interacts with or manipulates > packets going through it under any of these circumstances, so I have to ask > to learn :-) It helps only if the FreeBSD box is the sender of data on a TCP connection. In all the cases you've listed there it doesn't (and can't) help. It would help though if you were running a full http proxy on it. > The patch didn't apply cleanly to my 6.1-RELEASE. Since this patch was > cross-posted to -current I guess it wasn't meant for me. Any chance you can > provide a patch for 6.1-RELEASE? This is the output: I'll do a backport to RELENG_6 tomorrow when I'm back in the office. > # patch Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me... > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |Index: tcp_output.c > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/netinet/tcp_output.c,v > |retrieving revision 1.121 > |diff -u -p -r1.121 tcp_output.c > |--- tcp_output.c 22 Oct 2006 11:52:16 -0000 1.121 > |+++ tcp_output.c 16 Nov 2006 18:35:43 -0000 > -------------------------- > File to patch: /usr/src/sys/netinet/tcp_output.c > Patching file /usr/src/sys/netinet/tcp_output.c using Plan A... > Hunk #1 succeeded at 49 (offset 1 line). > Hunk #2 failed at 105. > Hunk #3 failed at 395. > 2 out of 3 hunks failed--saving rejects to > /usr/src/sys/netinet/tcp_output.c.rej > Done > > > > Lastly, is it enough to rebuild only the kernel after applying this patch? Yes. > Once again, sorry for these stupid questions but this is the only way for me > to learn and I really would like to have this patch running on my system. No problem. Your effort is appreciated. -- Andre