Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261881AbVDESgY (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:36:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261848AbVDESdz (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:33:55 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:22958 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261882AbVDESdH (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:33:07 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:32:41 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: "David S. Miller" Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [07/08] [TCP] Fix BIC congestion avoidance algorithm error Message-ID: <20050405113241.3389c9b8@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> In-Reply-To: <20050405112608.0b3c07f0.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20050405164539.GA17299@kroah.com> <20050405164758.GH17299@kroah.com> <20050405182202.GA11979@thunk.org> <20050405112608.0b3c07f0.davem@davemloft.net> Organization: Open Source Development Lab X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: &@E+xe?c%:&e4D{>f1O<&U>2qwRREG5!}7R4;D<"NO^UI2mJ[eEOA2*3>(`Th.yP,VDPo9$ /`~cw![cmj~~jWe?AHY7D1S+\}5brN0k*NE?pPh_'_d>6;XGG[\KDRViCfumZT3@[ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1473 Lines: 35 On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:26:08 -0700 "David S. Miller" wrote: > On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:22:02 -0400 > Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > If the congestion control alogirthm is "Reno-like", what is > > user-visible impact to users? There are OS's out there with TCP/IP > > stacks that are still using Reno, aren't there? > > An incorrect implementation of any congestion control algorithm > has ramifications not considered when the congestion control > author verified the design of his algorithm. > > This has a large impact on every user on the internet, not just > Linux machines. > > Perhaps on a microscopic scale "this" part of the BIC algorithm > was just behaving Reno-like due to the bug, but what implications > does that error have as applied to the other heuristics in BIC? > This is what I'm talking about. BIC operates in several modes, > one of which is a pseudo binary search mode, and another is a > less aggressive slower increase mode. > Therefore I think fixes to congestion control algorithms which > are enabled by default always should take a high priority in > the stable kernels. Also, hopefully distro vendors will pick up 2.6.11.X fixes and update their customers. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/