netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] RFC 4960 Errata fixes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 25 Jun 2017 14:44:30 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     marcelo.leitner@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
        nhorman@...driver.com, vyasevich@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] RFC 4960 Errata fixes

From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 19:58:39 -0300

> This patchset contains fixes for 4 Errata topics from
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-01
> Namely, sections:
>  3.12. Order of Adjustments of partial_bytes_acked and cwnd
>  3.22. Increase of partial_bytes_acked in Congestion Avoidance
>  3.26. CWND Increase in Congestion Avoidance Phase
>  3.27. Refresh of cwnd and ssthresh after Idle Period
> 
> Tests performed with netperf using net namespaces, with drop rates at
> 0%, 0.5% and 1% by netem, IPv4 and IPv6, 10 runs for each combination.
> I couldn't spot differences on the stats. With and without these patches
> the results vary in a similar way in terms of throughput and
> retransmissions.
> 
> Tests with 20ms delay and 20ms delay + drops at 0.5% and 1% also had
> results in a similar way, no noticeable difference.
> 
> Looking at cwnd, it was possible to notice slightly lower values being
> used while still sustaining same throughput profile.

Series applied, thank you.