On Friday 11 January 2008 22:23, Robert Hailey wrote: > > On Jan 11, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > Group 1: > > 100ms coalescing timeout. > > Various messages with short timeouts, or which we need to send > > quickly for one > > reason or another. > > ... > > FNPPing/FNPPong - ???? > > FNPLinkPing/FNPLinkPong - ???? > > Good or bad, I don't know... but in order for [SUB_]MAX_PING_TIME to > be the same stat the pings would either have to be queued with the > bulk data or a separate data-level-ping be made. Presently I suppose > it gives the combined send queue lengths (to/from) + rtt (x2), and the > caps are 700ms & 1500ms.
Yes and no. We don't use the above for ping time any more, we use the packet acknowledgements to calculate it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080112/d492593d/attachment.pgp>
