From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yan-Fa Li Subject: RE: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 13:30:32 -0700 Sender: owner-netdev@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C21250.003397A0" Cc: Mark Mielke , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: "'Ben Greear'" , Pekka Savola List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C21250.003397A0 Content-Type: text/plain Does this do what is needed ? I've used it and it does have an impact on stack performance while the application is running, but it tells you about retransmits and what not, and does not seem to affect performance much until you actually want to inspect the values. I agree with DaveM that it should not go into the mainline kernel unless you can turn it off with a sysctl, but it is useful for debugging and network health monitoring. Y http://heron.ucsd.edu/tcphealth/ ------_=_NextPart_001_01C21250.003397A0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped = packets

Does this do what is needed ?  I've used it and = it does have an impact on stack performance while the application is = running, but it tells you about retransmits and what not, and does not = seem to affect  performance much until you actually want to = inspect the values.  I agree with DaveM that it should not go into = the mainline kernel unless you can turn it off with a sysctl, but it is = useful for debugging and network health monitoring.

Y

http://heron.ucsd.edu/tcphealth/

------_=_NextPart_001_01C21250.003397A0--