TTCP/RFC1644 problem

[Danny Braniss]

> Danny Braniss wrote:
> > hi,
> > 	im running some experiments, and it seems to me that
> > setting net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 has the reverse effect.
> > with sysctl net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 = 0, the transaction uses only 6 packets
> > and it's less than 1 sec, setting net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 to 1 uses
> > 8 packets and takes more than 1 sec.
> 
> The first tcp session in an TTCP connection doesn't gain anything, only
> subsequent session can go faster.
> 

i have tried many. ( > 1), btw, your statement and what my reading of Stevens
don't 'coincide' :-), but then my experiment is not working either.

> You see in the second case that it tries to send data in the packet which
> is not ACKed for the first connection and has to be retransmitted.
> 
> You should check out the second and third connection to the server and
> look how they behave.
> 
> Did you enable rfc1644 on server and client?

yes!

what puzzels me is that with rfc1644 on on both ends it's slower than without 
it.

from Colin's answer i assume that my client is doing the right thing, the 
server
is not.