[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100329201431.GH20695@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:14:31 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Glen Turner <gdt@....id.au>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: UDP path MTU discovery
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:01:42AM -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
> >In theory one could probably add some hack in the the kernel UDP code
> >to hold one packet and retransmit it immediately with fragments when
> >the ICMP comes in. However that would be quite far in behaviour from
> >traditional UDP and be considered very ugly. It could also mess up
> >congestion avoidance schemes done by the application.
> >
> >Still might be preferable over rewriting zillions of applications?
>
> But which of the last N datagrams sent by the application should be
> retained for retransmission? It could be scores if not hundreds of
> datagrams depending on the behaviour of the application and the latency to
> the narrow part of the network.
Yes, if there's a large window you lose. I guess it would make protocols
like DHCP work at least ("transactional UDP" as the original poster called it)
I don't know if it would fix enough applications to be worth
implementing. The only way to find out would be to try I guess.
I don't have any better ideas.
> That the IPv6 specification was heavily "influenced" by "the router guys"
> seems increasingly clear...
Yes it sounds like the IETF didn't completely think that through.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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