Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 10:04:22 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com> Cc: j@lumiere.net, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: mbuf clusters and socket send buffers (was Re: 3.1-STABLE dies on 40+ connects) Message-ID: <199903261504.KAA23189@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <199903260054.QAA22060@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903251452370.1470-100000@leaf.lumiere.net> <199903260054.QAA22060@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 16:54:16 -0800 (PST), Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com> said: > A thought related to this discussion: does it make sense to allow the > send buffers to be larger than the peer's advertised window size? > In other words, why "preposition" those bytes in the kernel before > the peer has indicated a willingness to accept them? No, it doesn't. Just ask Van Jacobson. Unfortunately, that doesn't get OUR TCP stack rewritten any faster. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903261504.KAA23189>