All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: amwang@redhat.com, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, kaber@trash.net, edumazet@google.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] tcp: introduce tcp_tw_interval to specifiy the time of TIME-WAIT
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 10:30:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5065DEB3.3040508@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120928.024336.598451765169362800.davem@davemloft.net>

On 09/27/2012 11:43 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:33:07 +0800
>
>> I don't think reducing TIME_WAIT is a good idea either, but there must
>> be some reason behind as several UNIX provides a microsecond-scale
>> tuning interface, or maybe in non-recycle mode, their RTO is much less
>> than 2*MSL?

Microsecond?  HP-UX uses milliseconds for the units of the tunable, 
though that does not necessarily mean it will actually be implemented to 
millisecond accuracy

> Yes, there is a reason.  It's there for retaining multi-million-dollar
> customers.
>
> There is no other reasons these other systems provide these
> facilities, they are simply there in an attempt to retain a dwindling
> customer base.
 >
 > Any other belief is extremely naive.

HP-UX's TIME_WAIT interval tunability goes back to HP-UX 11.0, which 
first shipped in 1997.  It got it by virtue of using a "Mentat-based" 
stack which had that functionality.  I may not have my history 
completely correct, but Solaris 2 also got their networking bits from 
Mentat, and I believe shipped before HP-UX 11.

To my recollection, neither were faced with a dwindling customer base at 
the time.

rick jones

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-28 17:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-27  8:41 [RFC PATCH net-next] tcp: introduce tcp_tw_interval to specifiy the time of TIME-WAIT Cong Wang
2012-09-27 14:23 ` Neil Horman
2012-09-27 17:02   ` Rick Jones
2012-09-28  6:33   ` Cong Wang
2012-09-28  6:43     ` David Miller
2012-09-28 17:30       ` Rick Jones [this message]
2012-09-28 13:16     ` Neil Horman
2012-10-02  7:04       ` Cong Wang
2012-10-02 12:09         ` Neil Horman
2012-10-08  3:17           ` Cong Wang
2012-10-08 14:07             ` Neil Horman
2012-10-09  3:42               ` Cong Wang
2012-09-27 17:05 ` David Miller
2012-09-28  6:39   ` Cong Wang
2012-09-28  6:44     ` David Miller

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=5065DEB3.3040508@hp.com \
    --to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
    --cc=amwang@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.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.