From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) From: Kenny Lasse Hoff Levinsen In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 18:54:25 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8D18C6B4-B5AB-40DA-9DD7-097C9735A1EA@gmail.com> References: <0fae2f7ad3be7bc68e270f67be6c3392@lilly.quanstro.net> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] rtl8169 gbe slow Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8958857a-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Just in case you want a another point of reference to eliminate = weirdness with the specific box: http://de.kl.wtf/f/10mburandom Linode Arch Linux box in Frankfurt, serving you with a pretty standard = usage of Go=E2=80=99s http server. Should count as a =E2=80=9Cstock = linux box with a non-weird HTTP server=E2=80=9D. if you add an =E2=80=9Cs=E2=80=9D, you get TLS. If you add a =E2=80=9C0=E2= =80=9D, you get 100MB. If you remove a country code, it goes through = Cloudflare. You=E2=80=99ll have to guess where to insert and remove = those characters yourself, though! Best regards, Kenny Levinsen > On 23 Feb 2016, at 18:38, erik quanstrom = wrote: >=20 > On Tue Feb 23 09:25:53 PST 2016, 23hiro@gmail.com wrote: >> in the long run the rwin seems much higher (65535) than the number of >> bytes in flight (less than 3x1500 bytes). >>=20 >> i just noticed that the minimum latency numbers seem way low. many >> latency samples appear at around 40ms and 100ms, but there's also >> outliers? below 1ms. i don't get how this pcap got produced. perhaps >> wireshark is also interpreting it wrong, or timestamps are broken... >=20 >>> 26/status:Established qin 0 qout 0 rq 0.0 srtt 1256 mdev 628 sst = 65535 cwin >>> 4517 swin 5808>>0 rwin 65535>>4 qscale 0 timer.start 10 timer.count = 10 >>> rerecv 0 katimer.start 2400 katimer.count 2400 >>=20 >> where did you run this? >=20 > machine on the us west coast. clearly we are prevoking some sort of = odd behavior > in this machine, but it's not clear to me what we're doing. >=20 > the only clue we have is the out-of-window rxes. perhaps the sender = is scaling. >=20 > - erik >=20