From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
To: Kristian Evensen <kristian.evensen@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Strange TCP behavior over HSDPA
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 19:31:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091229183113.GA3081@del.dom.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B3A1284.2030101@gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 03:30:28PM +0100, Kristian Evensen wrote:
> Den 29.12.2009 14:36, skrev Jarek Poplawski:
> >On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:16:24PM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >>On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 10:57:48AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >>>Did you try to turn off TCP window scaling btw? Anyway, under the
> >>>tunnel ([2]), when SACK worked, it saved you a lot of retransmits.
> >>Hmm... Actually, after re-checking, there weren't much more of those
> >>retransmits at all. In [1] there was one more packet lost, so it took
> >>a bit longer. In [2] (with SACK) the retransmit started earlier and
> >>the rcv window was unchanged. So, it rather looks like differences
> >>in timing of TCP recovery techniques.
> >Hmm#2... On the other hand, I can imagine cases with a larger data
> >loss, where working SACK should really save on retransmits.
> >
> >Jarek P.
> Thanks for all your comments. I have not tried to disable window
> scaling, but will try that as soon as possible. I also noticed the
> second packet loss in [1], but I don't think it affected the
> situation to much. In similar packet captures, the transfer without
> the tunnel has only lost one packet and the throughput drop has been
> just as significant as in [1]. It rather seems to be, as you point
> out, differences in timing of the recovery techniques, probably
> between this accelerator and the server.
Then disabling window scaling seems too radical; maybe you should try
with lower tcp_rmem max etc.
>
> However, I find it a bit strange the dupAcks are sent back to the
> server. Based on my, I must admit limited, knowledge of
> accelerators, they will buffer and ACK packets if they for example
> are responsible for retransmissions. But again, maybe it uses the
> dupAcks to tell the server to slow down and then simply discards the
> retransmitted packet.
I'm not a TCP expert, but IMHO you don't need much knowledge to assess
quality of this accelerator, if you get better results when omitting
it (partly) with a tunnel ;-)
Jarek P.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-29 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-28 12:56 Strange TCP behavior over HSDPA Kristian Evensen
2009-12-29 8:30 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-12-29 9:59 ` Kristian Evensen
2009-12-29 10:57 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-12-29 12:16 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-12-29 13:36 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-12-29 14:30 ` Kristian Evensen
2009-12-29 18:31 ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091229183113.GA3081@del.dom.local \
--to=jarkao2@gmail.com \
--cc=kristian.evensen@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.