st curious. There seems to be a lot of room for improvement in the
algorithms...
- Jerry
-Original Message-
From: Eric Dumazet [mailto:eric.duma...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 1:06 PM
To: Jerry Jongerius
Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] What is
On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 19:40 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:05:46AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> Is anyone aware of any research either pointing out how their tuning
> >> algorithm works, or of known bugs/problems with the algorithm?
> > How BDP suggests a receive
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:05:46AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> Is anyone aware of any research either pointing out how their tuning
>> algorithm works, or of known bugs/problems with the algorithm?
> How BDP suggests a receive window of 750k ?
>
> If BDP _is_ 750k, then 3.8 MB receive window is
On Mon, 2014-09-01 at 13:23 -0400, Jerry Jongerius wrote:
> 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, B
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
