| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:26:15 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: csnook@...hat.com Cc: andi@...stfloor.org, rick.jones2@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Nagle latency tuning From: Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:22:13 -0400 > How horrendous of a layering violation would it be to attach TCP > performance parameters (either user-supplied or based on interface > stats) to route table entries, like route metrics but intended to > guide TCP autotuning? It seems like it shouldn't be that hard to > teach TCP that it doesn't need to optimize my lo connections much, > and that it should be optimizing my eth0 subnet connections for > lower latency and higher bandwidth than the connections that go > through my gateway into the great beyond. We already do this for other TCP connection parameters, and I tend to think these delack/ato values belong there too. If we add a global knob, people are just going to turn it on even if they are also connected to the real internet on the system rather than only internal networks they completely control. That tends to cause problems. It gets an entry on all of these bogus "Linux performance tuning" sections administrators read from the various financial messaging products. So everyone does it without thinking and using their brains. -- 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