RE: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread Simon Goldschmidt
> Is it worth adding a check like other checks that are in lwip_init? Up to 1.3.0, it seems to have been working with WND == MSS. And although this is not a good idea regarding performance, there are applications where it makes sense, e.g. if your system is too slow to receive two segments in a

RE: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread Bill Auerbach
Is it worth adding a check like other checks that are in lwip_init? Bill >Alain Mouette wrote: >> May I suggest that a comment about this be added in the config file. >> >> A special page on the wiki about configuring the many buffers in LWIP >> would be awsome too... This is a very obscure area

Re: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
Alain Mouette wrote: May I suggest that a comment about this be added in the config file. A special page on the wiki about configuring the many buffers in LWIP would be awsome too... This is a very obscure area in lwip config :( Please have a look at opt.h (and it's in there for a while no

Re: SV: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
Continuing this on lwip-devel... Jan Wester wrote: Hi I change my WND to 1024 (2*MSS) and now it works Thanks Simon and Kieran for your help Kieran, I studied Jans wireshark logs and indeed it looks a little strange that the window doesn't open unless it reaches 0, although lwIP was sendin

RE: [lwip-users] Re: TCP payload is doubled (Hans-Joerg)

2009-10-20 Thread David Shmelzer
Simon, It worked normally at normal speed, but the reported window size from lwip kept decreasing until it got to less than the packet length at which point it would pause as expected. I was having the same problem as Jan Wester who captured the problem in wireshark. http://lists.nongnu.org/archi

Re: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread Alain Mouette
May I suggest that a comment about this be added in the config file. A special page on the wiki about configuring the many buffers in LWIP would be awsome too... This is a very obscure area in lwip config :( Alain David Shmelzer escreveu: Mine works now too. I was also having the same proble

Re: [lwip-users] Ethernet - all packets over 32 dropped

2009-10-20 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
bobbyb wrote: It sends 32 packets each with 1500bytes total including all headers. changing it to PBUF_RAM had no effect :( Oh, you mean 32 packets? I thought you were talking of 32 bytes per packet! That's indeed odd. Are you freeing the packets correctly? 32 could be a limitation in your

Re: [lwip-users] Re: TCP payload is doubled (Hans-Joerg)

2009-10-20 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
David Shmelzer wrote: Thanks Hans. I was indeed calling tcp_recvd. Problem was my TCP_WND == TCP_MSS. I doubled TCP_WND and it now works. David, did it totally stop working or was it just slow (high latencies)? The reason I ask is it could be slow with WND==MSS, but it shouldn't stop working

RE: [lwip-users] Re: TCP payload is doubled (Hans-Joerg)

2009-10-20 Thread David Shmelzer
Thanks Hans. I was indeed calling tcp_recvd. Problem was my TCP_WND == TCP_MSS. I doubled TCP_WND and it now works. -Original Message- From: lwip-users-bounces+daves=pmdcorp@nongnu.org [mailto:lwip-users-bounces+daves=pmdcorp@nongnu.org] On Behalf Of HJ Sent: Friday, October 16,

RE: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread David Shmelzer
Mine works now too. I was also having the same problem where the window size kept decreasing. Thanks all. Dave -Original Message- From: lwip-users-bounces+daves=pmdcorp@nongnu.org [mailto:lwip-users-bounces+daves=pmdcorp@nongnu.org] On Behalf Of Jan Wester Sent: Tuesday, October

SV: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread Jan Wester
Hi I change my WND to 1024 (2*MSS) and now it works Thanks Simon and Kieran for your help Med vänliga hälsningar/Best Regards Jan Wester WHI Konsult AB Scheelegatan 11, SE-112 28 Stockholm www.whi.se i...@whi.se +46 8 449 05 30 +46 705 36 77 22 -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: lwip-use

Re: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread Simon Goldschmidt
> WND = 512 > MSS = 512 Having WND == MSS is generally not a good idea regarding throughput because that raises problems both with the nagle and delayed ack algorithm. You should at least make sure the nagle algorithm is turned off when having WND == MSS, although you can then still have probl

SV: [lwip-users] TCP problem

2009-10-20 Thread Jan Wester
Hi Kieran Can you explain the purpose of TCP_WND_UPDATE_THRESHOLD My MTU = 1500 WND = 512 MSS = 512 Med vänliga hälsningar/Best Regards Jan Wester WHI Konsult AB Scheelegatan 11, SE-112 28 Stockholm www.whi.se i...@whi.se +46 8 449 05 30 +46 705 36 77 22 -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från