From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat May 16 23:49:00 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA12780
          for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sat, 16 May 1998 23:49:00 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA12751
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 16 May 1998 23:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from root@implode.root.com)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA15423;
	Sat, 16 May 1998 23:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199805170646.XAA15423@implode.root.com>
To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: bad behaviour in slow start 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 16 May 1998 12:49:03 +0200."
             <199805161049.MAA04082@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 23:46:09 -0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>         * Don't force slow-start on local network.
...
>I think this is in violation of good TCP practices, and should be at
...
>comments ?

   When sending out to a local peer, ethernet and point-to-point devices will
buffer the initial burst of packets with the local buffers draining at the
speed of the available link bandwidth, so I don't see why you would want to
do slow start in this case. This is different than the case of a congested
upstream circuit where you don't know about the congestion and have no
control over the buffering.

-DG

David Greenman
Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message