Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:32:41 -0700 | From | Stephen Hemminger <> | Subject | Re: [07/08] [TCP] Fix BIC congestion avoidance algorithm error |
| |
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:26:08 -0700 "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:22:02 -0400 > Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: > > > If the congestion control alogirthm is "Reno-like", what is > > user-visible impact to users? There are OS's out there with TCP/IP > > stacks that are still using Reno, aren't there? > > An incorrect implementation of any congestion control algorithm > has ramifications not considered when the congestion control > author verified the design of his algorithm. > > This has a large impact on every user on the internet, not just > Linux machines. > > Perhaps on a microscopic scale "this" part of the BIC algorithm > was just behaving Reno-like due to the bug, but what implications > does that error have as applied to the other heuristics in BIC? > This is what I'm talking about. BIC operates in several modes, > one of which is a pseudo binary search mode, and another is a > less aggressive slower increase mode.
> Therefore I think fixes to congestion control algorithms which > are enabled by default always should take a high priority in > the stable kernels.
Also, hopefully distro vendors will pick up 2.6.11.X fixes and update their customers.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |