From: James Carlson <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
To: Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:04:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BACE918.7020508@workingcode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <v2v2d460de71003260939w4877df7em9e3084a315b0962f@mail.gmail.com>
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> Also, I am not sure if it would not be better to default to no
> fragmentation and enable it optionally. I am aware that changing default
> behaviour is always a bit of a problem but to the best of my knowledge
> enabling fragmentation is a bug in any and all real-world applications.
It worked well and was enabled by default on all the Bay Networks
equipment I used ~15 years ago. And I know for certain that we tested
with other gear (Ascend and Clam, probably) that did it right.
If it works with the equipment you're using, it's a useful feature in
that it can balance out the latencies among the links, resulting in much
lower overall latency observed by higher layers -- especially so on
lower-speed links where MP is more likely to be used. Without it,
you're left either waiting for the one slow link choking on a big packet
to catch up, or (worse) disabling the sequence headers altogether,
resulting in reordering unless you're really "clever."
It's a darned shame that lame implementations would force a change in
the default ...
--
James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: James Carlson <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
To: Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:04:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BACE918.7020508@workingcode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <v2v2d460de71003260939w4877df7em9e3084a315b0962f@mail.gmail.com>
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> Also, I am not sure if it would not be better to default to no
> fragmentation and enable it optionally. I am aware that changing default
> behaviour is always a bit of a problem but to the best of my knowledge
> enabling fragmentation is a bug in any and all real-world applications.
It worked well and was enabled by default on all the Bay Networks
equipment I used ~15 years ago. And I know for certain that we tested
with other gear (Ascend and Clam, probably) that did it right.
If it works with the equipment you're using, it's a useful feature in
that it can balance out the latencies among the links, resulting in much
lower overall latency observed by higher layers -- especially so on
lower-speed links where MP is more likely to be used. Without it,
you're left either waiting for the one slow link choking on a big packet
to catch up, or (worse) disabling the sequence headers altogether,
resulting in reordering unless you're really "clever."
It's a darned shame that lame implementations would force a change in
the default ...
--
James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-26 17:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-26 15:50 [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-03-26 15:50 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-03-26 15:58 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Alan Cox
2010-03-26 16:02 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Alan Cox
2010-03-26 16:33 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Joe Perches
2010-03-26 16:33 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Joe Perches
2010-03-26 16:39 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-03-26 16:39 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-03-26 16:39 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-03-26 16:59 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP David Miller
2010-03-26 16:59 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link David Miller
2010-03-26 17:04 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP David Miller
2010-03-26 17:04 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link David Miller
2010-03-26 17:04 ` James Carlson [this message]
2010-03-26 17:04 ` James Carlson
2010-03-26 16:59 ` Alexander E. Patrakov
2010-03-26 17:00 ` Alexander E. Patrakov
2010-03-26 17:04 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Alan Cox
2010-03-26 17:04 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Alan Cox
2010-03-31 10:03 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-03-31 10:03 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-05-29 2:16 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Paul Mackerras
2010-05-29 2:16 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Paul Mackerras
2010-05-29 9:06 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-05-29 9:06 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-05-29 9:06 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-05-31 13:39 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-05-31 13:39 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-05-31 13:39 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-05-31 16:20 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-05-31 16:20 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-02 14:55 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-02 14:55 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-02 15:04 ` [PATCH] ppp_generic: fix multilink fragment sizes Ben McKeegan
2010-06-02 15:04 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-02 15:17 ` Paoloni, Gabriele
2010-06-02 15:17 ` Paoloni, Gabriele
2010-06-02 15:31 ` David Miller
2010-06-02 15:31 ` David Miller
2010-06-02 15:55 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-02 15:55 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-03 8:41 ` Paoloni, Gabriele
2010-06-03 8:41 ` Paoloni, Gabriele
2010-06-03 9:14 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-03 9:14 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-11-08 14:05 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-11-08 14:05 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-11-15 12:07 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-11-15 12:07 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 10:20 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 10:20 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 10:20 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 11:18 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-01 11:18 ` Ben McKeegan
2010-06-01 11:28 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 11:28 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 11:28 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-06-01 22:15 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP David Miller
2010-06-01 22:15 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link David Miller
2010-03-31 9:01 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-03-31 9:01 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-03-31 9:01 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-05-25 9:52 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-05-25 9:52 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-05-25 9:52 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-05-25 10:18 ` walter harms
2010-05-25 14:58 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-05-25 17:30 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link walter harms
2010-05-26 8:47 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP Richard Hartmann
2010-05-26 8:47 ` [Patch] fix packet loss and massive ping spikes with PPP multi-link Richard Hartmann
2010-05-26 8:47 ` Richard Hartmann
2010-05-28 7:28 ` walter harms
2010-05-28 7:28 ` walter harms
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=4BACE918.7020508@workingcode.com \
--to=carlsonj@workingcode.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richih.mailinglist@gmail.com \
/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.