lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Bandwidth limits??
Date
In article <Pine.BSF.3.95.961020145816.736A-100000@edison.dialix.com.au>,
Keith Owens <kaos@edison.dialix.com.au> wrote:
>What about fudging the TCP window size in ACK packets we send back? If
>you want to throttle a sender, set a couple of variables in our sk_buff
>for that connection. window_adjust is the amount to reduce the window by,
>minimum_window is the lower limit of the adjusted window size, must be at
>least 41 to avoid completely shutting the window. psuedo code

How about some form of priority queueing, as implemented in Cisco routers,
where one is able to define ports as being low, medium or high priority
(actally a lot more in-between values too).

This enables reasonable telnet performance over even a heavily used link
carrying nntp/ftp-data traffic.

Yes, I have this enabled on my routers and terminal servers (not linux
boxes). Yes, it makes quite a difference as far as the users are concerned
(unless they want sparkling ftp performance, but we seldom go under 2kb/s
for them in any case)

AB
--
If you go down to the woods today you're sure for a big surpise: Teddies
in leather who bang heads together, with black liner round their eyes.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans