netdev - Re: TCP default congestion control in linux should be newreno

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]

Message-Id: <20081204.101805.45306327.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:18:05 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ldecicco@...il.com
Cc:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, saverio.mascolo@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TCP default congestion control in linux should be newreno

From: Luca De Cicco <ldecicco@...il.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 18:50:22 +0100

> Thank you for pointing out, we employed the kernel 2.6.24 with web100

That is so ancient, especially TCP wise, it isn't even funny.

And using the web100 patch adds yet more variables to the equation.

It doesn't really reflect what users are actually running in the world
today, not by a country mile.

You're not comparing what we're actually shipping in the kernel.org
kernel at all with your tests, which means your tests and results are
something close to useless for us.

I don't udnerstand why there are so many people who dice up their
kernels, or use very old kernels, then do some "research" and then
suggest we should change this or that with the kernel.org kernel as a
result.

Sorry, nobody here is going to take that seriously at all.
--
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