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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:40:00 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
	noboru.obata.ar@...achi.com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.22] TCP: Make TCP_RTO_MAX a variable (take 2)

David Miller wrote:
> From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 09:55:10 -0700
> 
> 
>>Fine, but so?  I suspect the point of the patch is to provide a
>>lower cap on the accumulated backoff so data starts flowing over the
>>connection within that lower cap once the link is
>>restored/failed-over.
> 
> 
> The backoff is there for a reason.

I'm not disputing the general value of the backoff, nor about the value of an 
initial value of 60 seconds.  In terms of avoiding congestive collapse one does 
indeed want the exponential backoff.  I'm just in agreement with the person from 
Hitachi that allowing someone to tweak the backoff has a certain value.

60 seconds is already a trade-off between a pure (non capped) exponential 
backoff and capping the value.

rick
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists