From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-32-ewr.dyndns.com (mxout-112-ewr.mailhop.org [216.146.33.112]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA992E0297 for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 15:58:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from scan-31-ewr.mailhop.org (scan-31-ewr.local [10.0.141.237]) by mail-32-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F14E56FB643 for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 23:58:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 209.85.215.43 Received: from mail-ew0-f43.google.com (mail-ew0-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) by mail-32-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 199236FB2FE for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 23:58:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy20 with SMTP id 20so1501943ewy.16 for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 15:58:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=H0l1LpPK0kyTlJkx4vfpchD2VSfHwkwA2VgNC1DW044=; b=mfVw+H0crbYTS9IHNlgtEwoN0d0hXx2uhObvkore1wLO1p+zNT0T41pDE0zwnruqtc 5SShdetXmfsEMGB+uBsDCfZEw0kCBQMl5kQ/rHdoqSa0bItq3S+LFWSiwoI1U1QYbGHl Kf22RX9v7CIP7BslSplxMkIUieDAuMctRkVxE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=Kfj68z7xjvtSqzgGGYZNmeiIBFKdtP1Luftl6G50TmhnHwXoLXegRMHjTk34eUcswR VaQw7EWVJzZU/bhr1kYUYkmibFNbwOHK9RUWTPHPqQsHVTLaFNRdqtSZcyswrtW9343Y GXzD3GI/Zj5Z5rR6cFhH9W9YrinYkO8+796Kk= Received: by 10.213.3.74 with SMTP id 10mr550678ebm.97.1299974291392; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 15:58:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.239.42] (xdsl-83-150-84-172.nebulazone.fi [83.150.84.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u45sm2369730eeh.8.2011.03.12.15.58.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 12 Mar 2011 15:58:11 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <1299968639.31851.30.camel@amd.pacdat.net> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 01:58:09 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5DBE09A9-B0D3-40CB-9816-22B18EA724E8@gmail.com> References: <16808EAB-2F52-4D32-8A8C-2AE09CD4D103@gmail.com> <1299899959.1835.10.camel@amd.pacdat.net> <10491D5A-AA1B-4F41-99A9-15A0C06ADF25@gmail.com> <1299902651.31981.7.camel@amd.pacdat.net> <462034BF-919D-4AE4-BA58-EA98C95D870F@gmail.com> <1299968639.31851.30.camel@amd.pacdat.net> To: richard X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] Measuring latency-under-load consistently X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 23:58:17 -0000 On 13 Mar, 2011, at 12:23 am, richard wrote: >> However, large TCP windows do consume RAM in both server and client, >> and with a sufficient number of simultaneous clients, that could >> theoretically cause trouble. Constraining TCP windows to near the >> actual BDP is more efficient all around. >=20 > Yes - have had RAM exhaustion problems on busy servers with large = video > files - major headache. Sounds like a good reason to switch to Vegas or at least Illinois on = those servers. Those are much less aggressive at growing the congestion = window than the default CUBIC. - Jonathan