From owner-freebsd-net Thu Oct 28 0:36:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [216.28.46.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33C2F14F7C for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 00:36:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from billf@chc-chimes.com) Received: by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E45761C2B; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 02:38:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D672C3837; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 02:38:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 02:38:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fumerola To: Craig Critchley Cc: dg@root.com, Garrett Wollman , net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FTP Net Performance In-Reply-To: <217001bf2117$7dfb5150$0201010a@fuzzer.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Craig Critchley wrote: > It's the same model netcard as what's in the BSD machine - Netgear FA310TX. > File sharing between Windows machines is *significantly* faster. I can > imagine that BSD thinks its already sent as much as the receiver can take, > but why does it think it needs to resend that particular piece when Windows > has ack'd it twice (unless doing so is a bad idea - like I said, I'm not > that much of an expert). ACKing twice is an indictation of dropped packets. It says "i'm going to keep acknowledging the last known good packet until you send me the one after it." .. or something like that. -- - bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message