On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:26:08 -0700
"David S. Miller" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:22:02 -0400
> Theodore Ts'o <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 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?
>
> An incorrect implementation of any congestion control algorithm
> has ramifications not considered when the congestion control
> author verified the design of his algorithm.
>
> This has a large impact on every user on the internet, not just
> Linux machines.
>
> Perhaps on a microscopic scale "this" part of the BIC algorithm
> was just behaving Reno-like due to the bug, but what implications
> does that error have as applied to the other heuristics in BIC?
> This is what I'm talking about. BIC operates in several modes,
> one of which is a pseudo binary search mode, and another is a
> less aggressive slower increase mode.
> Therefore I think fixes to congestion control algorithms which
> are enabled by default always should take a high priority in
> the stable kernels.
Also, hopefully distro vendors will pick up 2.6.11.X fixes and update their customers.
-
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]