1 |
There are quite a few things that make TCP performance degrade. Is there a |
2 |
specific reason why you thought about TCP timestamps? |
3 |
A good way to know is to launch a TCP connection and get it to a stage where |
4 |
you can clearly see its performance suffer. Then first take a look at the |
5 |
CPU usage... if its 100% only then you should conclude that the problem is |
6 |
with the CPU usage aspect of it. |
7 |
In my experience, there can be many other things that may go wrong. There |
8 |
are quite a few 'TCP tuning' faqs around the Internet. You might want to go |
9 |
through a few to see some commonly used solutions. |
10 |
|
11 |
OTOH, TCP timestamps are an important part of TCP... may be not for a LAN |
12 |
like system but definitely for a complicated network like the Internet, |
13 |
where timestamps help TCP to easily infer round trip times with much more |
14 |
precision than otherwise. |
15 |
|
16 |
_r |
17 |
|
18 |
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Kevin Faulkner <kevlar.kernel@×××××.com> |
19 |
wrote: |
20 |
|
21 |
> Miguel Sousa Filipe wrote: |
22 |
> |
23 |
>> There is no such thing has a TCP timestamp: |
24 |
>> http://freebie.fatpipe.org/~mjb/Drawings/TCP_Header.png<http://freebie.fatpipe.org/%7Emjb/Drawings/TCP_Header.png> |
25 |
>> |
26 |
>> so, that doesn't make any sense... |
27 |
>> |
28 |
> Your right and I'm wrong. |
29 |
> Its not in the header, its thrown on at the end.... |
30 |
> try doing |
31 |
> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_timestamps |
32 |
> |
33 |
> http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/protocol/tcp/option008.htm |
34 |
> http://www.securiteam.com/securitynews/5NP0C153PI.html |
35 |
> -- |
36 |
> gentoo-performance@l.g.o mailing list |
37 |
> |
38 |
> |