netdev - Re: [RFC] dccp ccid-3: High-res or low-res timers?

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]

Message-ID: <20081120062408.GD6227@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:24:08 +0100
From:	Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>
To:	Ian McDonald <ian.mcdonald@...di.co.nz>
Cc:	Leandro Sales <leandroal@...il.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	DCCP Mailing List <dccp@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, DCCP mailing list <dccp@...f.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] dccp ccid-3: High-res or low-res timers?

Thanks Ian for the comments and suggestions, which is input for further
work. Hope to start this poco a poco soon.

| > Do you think we could live with clamping the RTT to some sensible
| > minimum, since on a local LAN the use of congestion control is
| > questionable? I was thinking in the order of 0.5 ... 1msec.
| >
| I think that is a good idea - if 1 msec, and HZ = 1000 then we
| wouldn't lose any transmission capability.
| 
Probably it will require a bit of testing, it might be that some
fine-tuning is needed since a lower RTT also means a lower maximum
throughput -- but maybe that limit is fully sufficient for the target
operational range of CCID-3 (streaming, not bulk data transfer).

Gerrit
--
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