Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-19 Thread Daniele Lacamera
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

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-15 Thread Xiaoliang (David) Wei
simulation results, this modification will eliminate the slower growth problem. * 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 20

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-13 Thread Stephen Hemminger
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

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-13 Thread Ian McDonald
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

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-13 Thread Daniele Lacamera
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,

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-13 Thread Daniele Lacamera
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

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-13 Thread Daniele Lacamera
eq_end; } mtu_probe; + +#ifdef CONFIG_TCP_PACING +/* TCP Pacing structure */ + struct { + struct timer_list timer; + __u16 count; + __u16 burst; + __u8lock; + __u8delta; + } pacing; +#endif }; static inline struct tcp_sock *tcp_sk(const struct sock *sk) diff -ruN linux-2.6.18-

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-12 Thread Stephen Hemminger
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 proposa

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-12 Thread Ian McDonald
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 real

Re: TCP Pacing

2006-09-12 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
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 real

TCP Pacing

2006-09-12 Thread Daniele Lacamera
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 help improving performance in different scenarios, like