Re: [lwip-users] Acknowledgment frequency and throughput degradation

2014-05-30 Thread Pomeroy, Marty
Can't tell if this is the client or the server, but either way, make sure your Windows system is configured to disable Ack Delay, You can Google TCPAckFrequency and TCPNoDelay, or see http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5578595314 for instructions. You will have to reboot your Windows box

Re: [lwip-users] Pbuf chain

2014-05-30 Thread Simon Goldschmidt
Mike He wrote: If my understanding is correct, the pbuf that is passed to our recv callback is only the first in a chain, where we must traverse the chain to obtain the full packet? [..] Why would there be two conditions? Is ever one true when the other isn't? How do the lengths add up

Re: [lwip-users] lwip recv callback questions

2014-05-30 Thread Sergio R. Caprile
Hi, following is MY opinion (and experience) 1: Since the callback function is called by the stack as I instructed, I wouldn´t answer with ERR_ARG, since arg is just as I instructed the stack to call me... so, if you still do it because you don't trust the stack, then don't rely on it to stop

Re: [lwip-users] lwip recv callback questions

2014-05-30 Thread Mike He
Thanks Sergio, 1. Can you point me to a description of how to use the different error codes, then? 3. I just located the httpserver_raw in vendor's lwip package. It also doesn't call tcp_accepted. Perhaps the problem is that my vendor is using an outdated version, 1.3.2? On 5/30/2014

Re: [lwip-users] lwip recv callback questions

2014-05-30 Thread Mike He
Thanks Sergio, 1. Can you point me to a description of how to use the different error codes, then? 3. I just located the httpserver_raw in vendor's lwip package. It also doesn't call tcp_accepted. Perhaps the problem is that my vendor is using an outdated version, 1.3.2? On 5/30/2014

Re: [lwip-users] lwip recv callback questions

2014-05-30 Thread Simon Goldschmidt
Mike He wrote: 3. I just located the httpserver_raw in vendor's lwip package. It also doesn't call tcp_accepted. Perhaps the problem is that my vendor is using an outdated version, 1.3.2? That could well be. Tcp_accepted is our implementation of a listen backlog. You don't need to call it

Re: [lwip-users] lwip recv callback questions

2014-05-30 Thread Mike He
Thanks so much for your help Simon. I'd like to upgrade to the latest version. To your knowledge, have there been major changes since 1.3.2 with respect to how to write driver code to interface with our hardware? Thanks, Mike On 5/30/2014 12:53 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: Mike He wrote:

Re: [lwip-users] lwip recv callback questions

2014-05-30 Thread Sergio R. Caprile
1. Can you point me to a description of how to use the different error codes, then? Just follow the goto 3 1: [...] goto 3; 3: [...] check the available examples in the contrib tree: SMTP for a client, netio/httpserver_raw for a server AFAIK callback functions return ERR_OK when they do

Re: [lwip-users] broken DHCP/ARP interaction

2014-05-30 Thread Radouch, Zdenek
At long last, I understand the problem. The lesson I learned is that you can't trust the packet ether addresses -- they were being faked by the Cisco hardware (sending a packet with someone else's source address). The problem itself is a case of a poorly designed ARP proxy/optimization within