From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Codel] [RFC PATCH] codel: ecn mark at target
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2012 20:40:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1344192037.9299.1618.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK6E8=c9yFgvybfc1tV=1SGOM4C9yateoJ0w_Q79ypzH=X6beA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 11:14 -0700, Yuchung Cheng wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 19:26 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> >> It could be a flaw in linux implementation, I admit we had so many bugs
> >> that it could very well be still buggy.
> >
> > And at first glance, the following tcpdump seems suspect : We can see
> > all ACK are delayed by about 40 ms
> but RFC 3168 (sec 6.1.3) does not mandate immediate ACKs for ECE
> marked ones? is this because ECN response is per round-trip?
>
We should IMHO not delay ACKS, exactly like we react to a dropped
packet.
If not specified in RFC 3168, it seems a forgotten point.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-05 18:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-04 2:44 Dave Täht
2012-08-04 6:45 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-04 21:53 ` Kathleen Nichols
2012-08-05 3:06 ` Andrew McGregor
2012-08-05 5:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-05 16:53 ` Andrew McGregor
2012-08-05 16:58 ` Kathleen Nichols
2012-08-05 17:14 ` Andrew McGregor
2012-08-05 17:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-05 16:54 ` Richard Scheffenegger
2012-08-05 17:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-05 17:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-05 18:14 ` Yuchung Cheng
2012-08-05 18:40 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2012-08-05 19:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-06 16:22 ` Richard Scheffenegger
2012-08-06 16:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-06 17:50 ` Dave Taht
2012-08-06 19:09 ` Andrew McGregor
2012-08-06 20:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-10 17:48 ` Dave Taht
2012-08-04 7:00 ` Roger Jørgensen
2012-08-04 13:38 ` Richard Scheffenegger
2012-08-04 17:21 ` Eric Dumazet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/codel.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1344192037.9299.1618.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=codel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=ycheng@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox