Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: use RFC6298 compliant TCP RTO calculation

2016-06-14 Thread Yuchung Cheng
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote: > > * Yuchung Cheng | 2016-06-13 15:38:24 [-0700]: > > Hey Eric, Yuchung, > > regarding the missed mdev_max_us: internal communication problem. Daniel well > respin a v2 removing the no longer required mdev_max_us. > > >Thanks for the pat

Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: use RFC6298 compliant TCP RTO calculation

2016-06-13 Thread Hagen Paul Pfeifer
* Yuchung Cheng | 2016-06-13 15:38:24 [-0700]: Hey Eric, Yuchung, regarding the missed mdev_max_us: internal communication problem. Daniel well respin a v2 removing the no longer required mdev_max_us. >Thanks for the patch. I also have long wanted to evaluate Linux's RTO vs RFC's. > >Since this

Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: use RFC6298 compliant TCP RTO calculation

2016-06-13 Thread Yuchung Cheng
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Daniel Metz wrote: > This patch adjusts Linux RTO calculation to be RFC6298 Standard > compliant. MinRTO is no longer added to the computed RTO, RTO damping > and overestimation are decreased. > > In RFC 6298 Standard TCP Retransmission Timeout (RTO) calculation th

Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: use RFC6298 compliant TCP RTO calculation

2016-06-13 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 22:45 +0200, Daniel Metz wrote: > This patch adjusts Linux RTO calculation to be RFC6298 Standard > compliant. MinRTO is no longer added to the computed RTO, RTO damping > and overestimation are decreased. > > In RFC 6298 Standard TCP Retransmission Timeout (RTO) calculation