From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 18:17:19 2004 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 CEE6216A4CE; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:17:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from guns.icir.org (adsl-68-76-113-50.dsl.bcvloh.ameritech.net [68.76.113.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C74843D41; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:17:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mallman@icir.org) Received: from lawyers.icir.org (adsl-68-76-113-50.dsl.bcvloh.ameritech.net [68.76.113.50]) by guns.icir.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55DAC77A6D4; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:17:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from lawyers.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lawyers.icir.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C531610FFC3; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:17:17 -0500 (EST) To: David Malone From: Mark Allman In-Reply-To: <20040311225347.GA66644@walton.maths.tcd.ie> Organization: ICSI Center for Internet Research (ICIR) Song-of-the-Day: Ain't Even Done With the Night MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:17:17 -0500 Sender: mallman@icir.org Message-Id: <20040312021717.C531610FFC3@lawyers.icir.org> cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Who wants SACK? (Re: was My planned work on networking stack) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: mallman@icir.org List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:17:19 -0000 --=-=-= > On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 02:38:40PM -0500, Mark Allman wrote: > > > I looked for the paper I paraphrased, I'm pretty sure if was one by > > > Sally Floyd. > > > > I don't have the paper reference handy, but it's Sally's HighSpeed TCP > > work. I do happen to have a blurb on it sitting here that I think > > captures it well... Think of a network with an RTT of 100ms, a 1500 > > Mind you, Petri originally asked about evidence for two machines > back-to-back, and 100ms is rather long for that (unless you're at > Steven Low's lab ;-) (I gave what was a handy example that happened to be in the ICSI annual report that arrived on my desk yesterday. Check the RFC reference and re-compute as needed.) allman -- Mark Allman -- ICIR -- http://www.icir.org/mallman/ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iD8DBQFAUR2tWyrrWs4yIs4RAnnVAJ9UWx0ApxKo6hubo1vTBXDj13RmDQCdGRNu KkblOCosm+RAClfalxqmd3w= =L9WQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--