Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 3342 invoked by uid 6000); 4 Mar 1998 19:15:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 3316 invoked from network); 4 Mar 1998 19:15:10 -0000 Received: from valis.worldgate.com (marcs@198.161.84.2) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 4 Mar 1998 19:15:10 -0000 Received: from localhost (marcs@localhost) by valis.worldgate.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA03085 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 12:15:08 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 12:15:08 -0700 (MST) From: Marc Slemko To: TLOSAP Subject: Re: paper on "Promoting the Use of End-to-End Congestion Control" (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org The only way around this is to not disable Nagle. It may now be possible to do this without negative impact if we do things right. I will be looking into it further. On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote: > Dean, that explains it. Sigh. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 11:25:00 -0600 (CST) > From: David Borman > To: end2end-interest@ISI.EDU > Subject: Re: paper on "Promoting the Use of End-to-End Congestion Control" > > > All this discussion about the Nagle algorithm, buffer sizes > read/write sizes, etc. has been interesting. I'm not responding > to any particular message, but there is some details about the > typical BSD implementation that have not yet been discussed.