Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:18:29 +0500
From:      rihad <rihad@mail.ru>
To:        Eugene Grosbein <eugen@kuzbass.ru>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: dummynet dropping too many packets
Message-ID:  <4AC9E415.9040801@mail.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20091005120057.GA79942@svzserv.kemerovo.su>
References:  <20091005061025.GB55845@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <4AC9B400.9020400@mail.ru> <20091005090102.GA70430@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <4AC9BC5A.50902@mail.ru> <20091005095600.GA73335@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <20091005100446.GA60244@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <20091005100532.GC73335@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <4AC9C88A.5050509@mail.ru> <20091005113037.GA77999@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <4AC9DD72.9060802@mail.ru> <20091005120057.GA79942@svzserv.kemerovo.su>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 04:50:10PM +0500, rihad wrote:
> 
>>>> Where has TCP slow-start gone? My router box 
>>>> isn't some application proxy that starts downloading at full 100 mbit/s 
>>>> thus quickly filling client's 1 mbit/s link. It's just a router.
>>> While there is no or little competition for bandwidth from the router
>>> to clients, TCP would work just fine. I suspect your shaping policy
>>> makes heavy competition between clients. In this case, TCP behaves
>>> not-so-well without help of router's good shaping algorythms
>>> and taildrop is not good one.
>>>
>> Nothing fancy (i.e. no competition). Only tons of per-user pipes 
>> simulating the given throughput.
> 
> You've mentioned previously: "The pipes are fine, each normally having
> 100-120 concurrent consumers (i.e. active users)."
> This IS competition between TCP flows inside each pipe.
> 
Well, each user gets instantiated with a new copy of the pipe. Each such 
user counts towards the limit imposed by hash_size*max_chain_len for 
that pipe only. It would have been competition had I used dst-ip dst-ip 
0xffffff00 or similar and not dst-ip 0xffffffff, _then_ all 256 users 
(determined by the mask) would compete for the pipe's bandwidth. So the 
only competition is in the uplink at our main Cisco, I guess.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AC9E415.9040801>