Luckily, I don't mind being wrong (or even _way_ off the mark).
I don't think that's it.
>
> First a nitpick: the PowerBook version of the late-model G4 (7447A)
> doesn't have the external L3 cache interface, so it only has the 256KB or
> 512KB internal L2 cache (I forget which). The desktop ver
On 1 Sep, 2014, at 11:25 pm, Aaron Wood wrote:
>>> But this doesn't really answer the question of why the WNDR has so much
>>> lower a ceiling with shaping than without. The G4 is powerful enough that
>>> the overhead of shaping simply disappears next to the overhead of shoving
>>> data aroun
> > But this doesn't really answer the question of why the WNDR has so much
> lower a ceiling with shaping than without. The G4 is powerful enough that
> the overhead of shaping simply disappears next to the overhead of shoving
> data around. Even when I turn up the shaping knob to a value quite
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> On 1 Sep, 2014, at 8:01 pm, Dave Taht wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:18 AM, Jonathan Morton
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 31 Aug, 2014, at 1:30 am, Dave Taht wrote:
>>>
Could I get you to also try HFSC?
>>>
>>> Once I got a kernel ru
On 1 Sep, 2014, at 8:01 pm, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:18 AM, Jonathan Morton
> wrote:
>>
>> On 31 Aug, 2014, at 1:30 am, Dave Taht wrote:
>>
>>> Could I get you to also try HFSC?
>>
>> Once I got a kernel running that included it, and figured out how to make it
>> do what
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jerry Jongerius wrote:
> Westwood+, as described in published researched papers, does not fully
> explain the graph that was seen. However, Westwood+, as implemented in
> Linux, DOES fully explain the graph that was seen. One place to review the
> source code is
Westwood+, as described in published researched papers, does not fully
explain the graph that was seen. However, Westwood+, as implemented in
Linux, DOES fully explain the graph that was seen. One place to review the
source code is here:
http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/net/ipv4/tcp_westwood
I am noticing (via WireShark traces) at times that Microsoft's (Windows 7)
receive window auto-tuning goes horribly wrong, causing significant buffer
bloat. And at other times, the tuning appears to work just fine.
For example, BDP suggests a receive window of 750k, and most often Windows
tunes a
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:18 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> On 31 Aug, 2014, at 1:30 am, Dave Taht wrote:
>
>> Could I get you to also try HFSC?
>
> Once I got a kernel running that included it, and figured out how to make it
> do what I wanted...
>
> ...it seems to be indistinguishable from HTB
Hi Jerry,
isn't this the problem statement of Conex?
Again, you at the end host would gain little insight with Conex, but every
intermediate network operator can observe the red/black marked packets, compare
the ratios and know to what extent (by looking at ingress vs egress into his
network )
10 matches
Mail list logo