On Tue, Nov 03, 1998 at 11:51:40PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Using tcpdump, I observed that when the window shrunk below
> > 1448, to lets say 1400 bytes, I'd get 1 packet sending 1400 bytes,
> > and then the next ethernet packet sending 48 bytes. This would
> > alternate until the transmission was done. As a result, I'd fall from
> > an average of 970k/sec doing a web transfer to around 4k/sec.
>
> Yes thats what I'd expect. Your window is too small
Enlighten me -- wouldn't it make more sense to send the next
entire TCP buffer in one ethernet frame instead of just sending
48 bytes? You'd lose out on each 48 bytes of the ethernet frame,
but you woulnd't lose the 1400 bytes every other frame like we
are now.
-Steve
--
______________________________________________________________________________
Steve Shah ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | SysAdmin/Coder/Gabbernaut/DJ/Writer/Minister
http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~sshah | We're not dropping out, we're infiltrating.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beating code into submission, one operating system at a time...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
