[105166] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Best utilizing fat long pipes and large file transfer
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kevin Oberman)
Fri Jun 13 14:29:14 2008
To: Robert Boyle <robert@tellurian.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:40:48 EDT."
<1213375252_14636@mail1.tellurian.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:28:37 -0700
From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
X-To: Robert Boyle <robert@tellurian.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1213381717_53832P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:40:48 -0400
> From: Robert Boyle <robert@tellurian.com>
>
> At 12:01 PM 6/13/2008, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >Clearly you have failed to try very hard or to check into what others
> >have done. We routinely move data at MUCH higher rates over TCP at
> >latencies over 50 ms. one way (>100 ms. RTT). We find it fairly easy to
> >move data at over 4 Gbps continuously.
>
> That's impressive.
>
> >If you can't fill a GE to 80% (800 Mbps) at 30 ms, you really are not
> >tying very hard. Note: I am talking about a single TCP stream running
> >for over 5 minutes at a time on tuned systems. Tuning for most modern
> >network stacks is pretty trivial. Some older stacks (e.g. FreeBSD V6)
> >are hopeless. I can't speak to how Windows does as I make no use of it
> >for high-speed bulk transfers.
>
> Let me refine my post then...
> In our experience, you can't get to line speed with over 20-30ms of
> latency using TCP on _Windows_ regardless of how much you tweak
> it. >99% of the servers in our facilities are Windows based. I should
> have been more specific.
Sorry, but I don't do Windows, but my friends who do claim that this is
not true.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751
--==_Exmh_1213381717_53832P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 06/03/2002
iD8DBQFIUrxVkn3rs5h7N1ERAgHrAJ43dQAYuhhZbtF2yV0aSBUQ13UZHACgiXav
6qk+uMbqi9aqGQCKkOLVdpg=
=6qwc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1213381717_53832P--
