netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] TCP: increase default initial receive window.

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:	Fri, 17 Dec 2010 21:13:09 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	nanditad@...gle.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, therbert@...gle.com, chavey@...gle.com,
	ycheng@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] TCP: increase default initial receive window.

From: Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@...gle.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:20:51 -0800

> This patch changes the default initial receive window to 10 mss
> (defined constant). The default window is limited to the maximum
> of 10*1460 and 2*mss (when mss > 1460).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@...gle.com>

That's an incredibly terse explanation for a very non-trivial
change with very non-trivial implications.

What analysis have you performed to lead you to decide that this
was a reasonable change to make?  Where can people see that
analysis and look over it to see if they agree with your
assesment of the data?

We can't apply a patch like that without any form of analysis or
reasoning.

You don't say "why" you're doing this, and frankly that really
ticks me off.
--
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