Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 17:45:47 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: Erich Weiler <weiler@soe.ucsc.edu> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Jason Wolfe <nitroboost@gmail.com>, grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au> Subject: Re: Arg. TCP slow start killing me. Message-ID: <4EC072CB.5030800@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4EC05F58.1050103@soe.ucsc.edu> References: <4EC033B7.5080609@soe.ucsc.edu> <4EC0395C.3030302@swin.edu.au> <4EC055CB.40100@soe.ucsc.edu> <4EC0585F.5000104@soe.ucsc.edu> <CAAAm0r0TO5ifZ_-s%2BJEN5jwRNuZQq=8t6zRRKSnfPBTO2Rb%2Bng@mail.gmail.com> <4EC05F58.1050103@soe.ucsc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/13/11 4:22 PM, Erich Weiler wrote: >> Yeah, skimming fail, I didn't realize the machine was not the >> termination point of your connections. I do have patches back ported >> that would likely get the modular congestion control working on 8.1, >> but neither my suggestions nor the implementation of Cubic will help >> much as mentioned. > > Given that my firewall is simply forwarding packets in and out, and > is not an endpoint, does anyone think tuning up buffers would help > here? If so, which buffers/sysctl parameters would be worth trying? I can not answer abut pf but I'll say that if I were using ipfw I would use dummynet to rate linit the speed that the incoming packets were passed on to the client macjines and I would make that limit just alittle slower than the incoming link's real speed. that way the linit would be In my machine instead of in my ISPs machines. If pf has a similar mechanism to dummy net then you may be able to try that. > > Thanks for the help everyone! > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EC072CB.5030800>