On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:47:59AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
>
> -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
>
> While redoing BIC for the split up version, I discovered that the
> existing 2.6.11 code doesn't really do binary search. It ends up
> being just a slightly modified version of Reno. See attached graphs
> to see the effect over simulated 1mbit environment.
I hate to be a stickler for the rules, but does this really meet this
criteria?
- It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
problem..." type thing.)
If the congestion control alogirthm is "Reno-like", what is
user-visible impact to users? There are OS's out there with TCP/IP
stacks that are still using Reno, aren't there?
Knowing the answer to the question, "How does this bug `bother' either
users or network administrators?" would probably be really helpful.
- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
