On Saturday 16 September 2006 02:41, Xiaoliang (David) Wei wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> Thank you very much for the patch and the reference summary. For
> the implementation and performance of pacing, I just have a few
> suggestion/clarification/support data:
>
> First, in the implementation in the
On 9/13/06, Daniele Lacamera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As Ian requested, some of the papers published about Pacing.
Hi Daniel,
Thank you very much for the patch and the reference summary. For
the implementation and performance of pacing, I just have a few
suggestion/clarification/support
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 10:18:31 +0200
Daniele Lacamera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 September 2006 05:41, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > Pacing in itself isn't a bad idea, but:
>
> > * Since it is most useful over long delay links, maybe it should be a
> route parameter.
>
Look into
On 9/13/06, Daniele Lacamera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 23:26, Ian McDonald wrote:
> Where is the published research? If you are going to mention research
> you need URLs to papers and please put this in source code too so
> people can check.
I added the main referen
As Ian requested, some of the papers published about Pacing.
* Main reference:
-
Amit Aggarwal, Stefan Savage, and Thomas Anderson.
"Understanding the Performance of TCP Pacing".
Proc. of the IEEE INFOCOM 2000 Conference on Computer Communications,
March 2000, pages 1157 - 11
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 23:26, Ian McDonald wrote:
> Where is the published research? If you are going to mention research
> you need URLs to papers and please put this in source code too so
> people can check.
I added the main reference to the code. I am going to give you all the
pointers o
On Wednesday 13 September 2006 05:41, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Pacing in itself isn't a bad idea, but:
> * Since it is most useful over long delay links, maybe it should be a
route parameter.
What does this mean? Should I move the sysctl switch elsewhere?
A new (cleaner) patch follows.
Thanks
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:58:21 +0200
Daniele Lacamera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Please let me insist once again on the importance of adding a TCP Pacing
> mechanism in our TCP, as many people are including this algorithm in
> their congestion control proposals. Recent researches hav
On 9/13/06, Daniele Lacamera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Please let me insist once again on the importance of adding a TCP Pacing
mechanism in our TCP, as many people are including this algorithm in
their congestion control proposals. Recent researches have found out
that it really can hel
On 9/12/06, Daniele Lacamera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Please let me insist once again on the importance of adding a TCP Pacing
mechanism in our TCP, as many people are including this algorithm in
their congestion control proposals. Recent researches have found out
that it really can hel
10 matches
Mail list logo
