From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Apr 27 08:37:13 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073EFB1CB3E for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 08:37:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daemon-user@freebsd.org) Received: from reviews.nyi.freebsd.org (reviews.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:607c::16:b]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81B11BA5 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 08:37:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daemon-user@freebsd.org) Received: by reviews.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1346) id D522EC758; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 08:37:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 08:37:11 +0000 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org From: "sepherosa_gmail.com (Sepherosa Ziehau)" Reply-to: D5872+325+9dea0574509cdbb3@reviews.freebsd.org Subject: [Differential] D5872: tcp: Don't prematurely drop receiving-only connections Message-ID: <0816d5d4d4f59b777cd9a31a83d80a88@localhost.localdomain> X-Priority: 3 X-Phabricator-Sent-This-Message: Yes X-Mail-Transport-Agent: MetaMTA X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-Phabricator-Mail-Tags: Thread-Topic: D5872: tcp: Don't prematurely drop receiving-only connections X-Herald-Rules: <64> X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-To: X-Phabricator-Cc: X-Phabricator-Cc: X-Phabricator-Cc: Precedence: bulk In-Reply-To: References: Thread-Index: MmVmNzYzNzljOGQxMmM4MWI4MmNjYzcxMzczIFcgejc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 08:37:13 -0000 sepherosa_gmail.com added a comment. In https://reviews.freebsd.org/D5872#130173, @mike-karels.net wrote: > I disagree; congestion is congestion, not "congestion for everyone but me". I'd prefer to leave the cwnd change until it is replaced by something more modern. We probably can leave the cwnd resetting to later rexmt timeout or possible later fast retransmit (I think fast retransmit could kick in under some cases, if ENOBUFS happened); instead of resetting the cwnd immediately upon ENOBUFS. REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D5872 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: sepherosa_gmail.com, network, glebius, adrian, delphij, decui_microsoft.com, honzhan_microsoft.com, howard0su_gmail.com, freebsd-net-list, lstewart, hiren, jtl, transport Cc: gnn, mike-karels.net, jtl