From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264928AbUGGGif (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2004 02:38:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264931AbUGGGif (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2004 02:38:35 -0400 Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.236]:15150 "EHLO pfepb.post.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264928AbUGGGhq (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2004 02:37:46 -0400 Subject: Re: quite big breakthrough in the BAD network performance, which mm6 did not fix From: Redeeman To: bert hubert Cc: LKML Mailinglist , Horst von Brand In-Reply-To: <20040707063100.GA18382@outpost.ds9a.nl> References: <200407061930.i66JUpqI009671@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> <1089160973.903.1.camel@localhost> <200407061812.24526.lkml@lpbproductions.com> <1089179186.10677.8.camel@localhost> <20040707063100.GA18382@outpost.ds9a.nl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 08:37:44 +0200 Message-Id: <1089182265.10687.4.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 1.5.9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 08:31 +0200, bert hubert wrote: > On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 07:46:26AM +0200, Redeeman wrote: > > this must be some misunderstanding, i do not want to complain, and i > > dont hope people get that impression, i am trying to do feedback, so > > that issues can be fixed. > > Redeeman - your firewall is broken, or somebody's firewall. i dont have a firewall, but i am afraid my isp probably is doing something, after reading another thread :( > > Look at /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_default_win_scale , if it currently contains > 7, do: > > echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_default_win_scale its 1 as default, using the tcp patch from another thread fixes so that i can connect to sites. (packages.gentoo.org etc) where before that patch came, i echo'ed 0 into it, and it worked aswell, however i didnt get more than 50kb/s either :| > and retry. > > > downloads with 200kb/s from http://kernel.org, and 2.6.7 only 50kb/s, > > this should be able to prove its some issues with 2.6.7, but thats just > > my opinion > > Things can be more complicated than they appear. Currently all evidence for > these changes points to firewalls messing with TCP options, TCP options > which used to have more default versions in older kernels. yes, i just realised that :( > > Regards, > > bert >