Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 23:32:42 -0800 From: Jordan Mendelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ok, but why doesn't 2.2.16 exhibit this behavior? We've had reports from quite a number of people complaining about this and I'm fairly certain not all of them are from Earthlink. The only thing different is that 2.2.x is packetizing the write() system calls on the server differently, otherwise there is no difference whatsoever. What 2.4.x is doing is completely legal. Really, even if not all of these people are from Earthlink (well, you should see if this is for certain) they may all be using the same buggy terminal server at these different ISPs. Later, David S. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win98 SE PPP David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win98 SE... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win9... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> ... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-&... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 &... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Rogier Wolff
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 &... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> ... Rogier Wolff
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win98 SE PPP Jordan Mendelson