* Kieran Mansley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070608 10:01]: > On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 09:18 +0200, Per-Henrik Lundblom wrote: > > Now to the problem, lwIP doesn't split up > > the data in the unsent queue to fit into A's window. Is this really a > > problem? > > Shouldn't be. It might slow things down for a while, as it prevents B > sending, but if A is struggling to process the data that's probably not > a bad thing.
Good, that is my understanding too =) > > In my case, A's window update is lost by B so that B doesn't know that A > > now accepts data packets with a size equal or larger than the packet in > > B's unsent queue. If A's window whould have been 0 bytes, then > > implementation of TCP persist timer into lwIP whould have solved the > > problem by letting B probe A for a window update. Now when A's window > > update is lost, I'm in a deadlock situation. > > Hmm, yes, I can see what you're getting at. The only solution here is > to get B to do zero-window style probes to get a window update from A. > Normally it would only have to do this when it actually has a zero > window available to send into, but we need it to probe whenever it has > seen a window that prevents it sending. Splitting the data might also > work, but would rather complicate matters, and probably add more code. I will look into implementing the persistent timer and using the same mechanism for sending probes without the remote peer having a zero window. /PH -- Per-Henrik Lundblom epost: [EMAIL PROTECTED] telefon: 0733-20 71 26 hemsida: www.whatever.nu _______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
