In some mail from gregory duchemin, sie said: > > hello, > > know if the TCP silly window syndrome might be used too ? > Uploading/downloading files byte per byte to/from a remote ftp server with a > stupid window size of one byte may generate a very high overhead. Silly window sizes aren't so bad. If you have a window size of one then you only ever have one outstanding piece of data sent at a time. So if I have 16k of data, it might take 32k or more packets, but I can only send one packet at a time. In contrast, if I have a window of 16384 but the TCP MSS is only 1, I can send all 16384 bytes now, each in their own packet, and more as I get ACKs from the receiver. Darren
- Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Darren Reed
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Darren Reed
- RE: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? David LeBlanc
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Pavel Machek
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Eric Vyncke
- RE: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Russ
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == ... Darren Reed
- RE: Small TCP packets == very large overhead... David LeBlanc
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? gregory duchemin
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Darren Reed
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == ... John Kristoff
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == ... Brett Lymn
- RE: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Franck Martin
- Re: Small TCP packets == very large overhead == DoS? Crist Clark
