luc at luker.on.ca
Mon Apr 19 16:43:13 UTC 2004
Alexander Dalloz said:
> Am Mo, den 19.04.2004 schrieb Martin Stone um 17:04:
>> Wow, there's a candidate for the Most Pointless Response Award...
> Then please feed me and and the others with real data - on Linux /
> Fedora! - for comparison between default TCP values and after
> I once did a research for DSL performance - whatever is meant by that:
> throughput or latency or what else? - and did my own tests. The
> conclusion from what I got by internet research (unfortunately I can not
> quickly find the testing again where the TCP value setting were checked)
> and by own tests was: does not change anything.
> In contrast in an ethernet network TCP values have a bigger influence
> and respecting the specific environment and the services running it
> might influence speed and reliability of network connections to change
> kernel TCP stack parameters.
> but for DSL home users it is worthless to fiddle with these things.
> There is even a risk to make things worse. A DSL user should better
> check whether traffic shaping make sense (keyword: wondershaper).
I must disagreee with you here Alexander, when we setup our RH9 box for DSL we did in
fact need to make some changes to the TCP stack on the box. Unfortunately, I don't have
access to the box from work and can't list the changes we made. However the first item
on a google search for "Linux performance tuning" willl bring you to the site we used
for the basis of our tweaking. Granted most of the performance enhancement was for
Apache and FTP, my downloads speeds from the internet to my internal workstation were
Also, the pppoe script need to be modified for the MTU size, but this was at the
direction of my ISP for their configuration.
More information about the users