Gentoo Archives: gentoo-performance

From: Miguel Sousa Filipe <miguel.filipe@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-performance@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-performance] TCP perfomance
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2008 22:28:59
Message-Id: f058a9c30806071528x19ddf989r9b0350150218c204@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-performance] TCP perfomance by Kevin Faulkner
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Kevin Faulkner <kevlar.kernel@×××××.com> wrote:
> Miguel Sousa Filipe wrote: >> >> There is no such thing has a TCP timestamp: >> http://freebie.fatpipe.org/~mjb/Drawings/TCP_Header.png >> >> so, that doesn't make any sense... > > Your right and I'm wrong. > Its not in the header, its thrown on at the end....
...at the end of the tcp header, it's a tcp option. (I didn't understood that the first time I read this email). It might be good to disable all tcp optional headers.. Also there might be important to look at issues such has: - mtu size - tcp window - set the don't fragment flag (this can offload the routers and optimize the mtu for the whole connection path) - use the BIC algorithm (from what I've read, that's my default choice nowadays... but for some specific workload there might be better algorithms) kind regards! -- Miguel Sousa Filipe -- gentoo-performance@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-performance] TCP perfomance Kevin Faulkner <kevlar.kernel@×××××.com>