From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pd0-x22b.google.com (mail-pd0-x22b.google.com
	[IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22b])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
	Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B6EE21F4EC
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f171.google.com with SMTP id p10so10716984pdj.16
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version;
	bh=LCGVVGkYYpjpYw9ylFWQgIViVR2Zk7Ek5inXU/Wu4r0=;
	b=xOWRZ5x9OWZ23bQXDsK6GC2T27IJ/qGIO7VaZHKgerqM+b32LomO4+DNVWhLZOkls5
	tQh72Csl6xntfAFpetEl1jmwTq9W73+5oOlkJKatfPR1l/LUGJmUhZYm40YEbLLlYQj3
	FPihk8g9pDBzMFWqtbw1/Uny35Z1o5vt/ofD3nH7ygXPpjvxDI3ILzlfn7Xz5oh/vJfn
	GVCdWswBGNJVQo0QB7vwOQb66iIILlSA45pEBLPmxPCQ3Xp8qATALXg9Sc1O7oeml0NN
	L2S23NOYEFyQvTAI91zV6XIV2N4rYBBtHjuhogM0c2DwHZTOc41I4ydyHDeBcnWb3MFq
	AcGA==
X-Received: by 10.66.234.105 with SMTP id ud9mr3566622pac.52.1410455147471;
	Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620:0:1000:3e02:64d0:ed57:c918:d391?
	([2620:0:1000:3e02:64d0:ed57:c918:d391])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id hs8sm1609591pbc.35.2014.09.11.10.05.46
	for <multiple recipients>
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:05:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1410455146.7106.55.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Jerry Jongerius <jerryj@duckware.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:05:46 -0700
In-Reply-To: <000001cfc609$697feb30$3c7fc190$@duckware.com>
References: <000001cfc609$697feb30$3c7fc190$@duckware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] What is wrong with Microsoft's receive window
 auto-tuning?
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 17:06:16 -0000

On Mon, 2014-09-01 at 13:23 -0400, Jerry Jongerius wrote:
> I am noticing (via WireShark traces) at times that Microsoft's (Windows 7)
> receive window auto-tuning goes horribly wrong, causing significant buffer
> bloat.  And at other times, the tuning appears to work just fine.
> 
> For example, BDP suggests a receive window of 750k, and most often Windows
> tunes around 1MB -- but at other times, it will tune to 3.8MB (way more than
> it should).
> 
> Is anyone aware of any research either pointing out how their tuning
> algorithm works, or of known bugs/problems with the algorithm?

How BDP suggests a receive window of 750k ?

If BDP _is_ 750k, then 3.8 MB receive window is not insane, it depends
on the amount of drops and how fast you want to recover from drops.

1MB would be to small as a matter of fact.