Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 21:09:44 -0400 From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> To: Paul Robinson <paul@akita.co.uk> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network performance tuning. Message-ID: <20010712210944.A73446@ussenterprise.ufp.org> In-Reply-To: <20010712175539.B93119@jake.akitanet.co.uk>; from paul@akita.co.uk on Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 05:55:39PM %2B0100 References: <20010711195021.A89324@ussenterprise.ufp.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107111904220.60496-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20010712175539.B93119@jake.akitanet.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 05:55:39PM +0100, Paul Robinson wrote: > When I asked about SACK about 18 months ago (IIRC), the general consensus > was that it was a pile of crap, and that FBSD SHOULDN'T implement it if > possible. I however, agree that there are a lot of things in SACK that would > massively benefit FBSD's net performance. Does anyone know if Luigi's patches at http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/sack.html ever got wider use than his own testing? It looks like it was written some time ago, and if people have been running it since then there might be some real world data. If it helps, it could be a win for web servers, as it appers Win98 has SACK on by default. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org Systems Engineer - Internetworking Engineer - CCIE 3440 Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010712210944.A73446>