Quoting Ian McDonald: | Folks, | | CCID3 is fscked up. Sorry to put it this way but thats how I feel. | | With 2.6.19rc6 plus the patches from | http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/dccp/patches/ it works fine. (The only | significant patch here is tx_qlen - all the rest should have no | impact). Thank you for this carefully worded bug report :-)
Really, with the number of bugs that are still in the code, I am actually amazed that we get this far 8-) I don't think that doing performance-testing at this stage is of any use. When you repair your car and take out half of the engine, then take it for a spin, do you expect top-gear performance? I am aware that at least in the RTT calculation there are still bugs. Another thing has to do with the RTO/nofeedback-timer issue. Thank you for forwarding this onto the IETF list. May I remind you that using the TCP default RTO of 1 second was precisely the non-standard behaviour CCID 3 used to have in 2.6.19??? So here is a likely explanation #2 for the amazing performance after initial auditing against RFCs. I am not convinced by mere performance results of earlier patches. The CCID3 code does not even conform to RFC 3448 -- loss event rates are calculated at the receiver, not at the sender; the receiver does not implement the window counter value; the generation of loss interval options is missing; part of the RTT calculation is broken; there is no sanity-checking of feedback packets; ..... Work to do! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
