|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org From: Rob Seastrom <rs-lists@seastrom.com> In-Reply-To: <A34E1C34-4E93-4FEF-8184-4A8EE5285C9B@fiberphone.co.nz> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 10:35:58 -0500 To: Pete Mundy <pete@fiberphone.co.nz> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org I haven't done packet dumps to verify the behavior (too busy catching up = on holiday email) but I can't help but wonder if IW10 (on by default in = FreeBSD 10 which I believe might be what Netflix has underneath) is = causing this problem, and that maybe a more gentle CWND ramp-up (or = otherwise tweaking the slow start behavior) for prefixes that are known = to be in networks with weak hardware might be a good choice. Of course this would be a change on Netflix's end... as for things the = ISP could do to alleviate the problem the answer is always "sure, but = it'll cost ya". -r > On Jan 4, 2016, at 3:11 AM, Pete Mundy <pete@fiberphone.co.nz> wrote: >=20 >=20 > Very succiently put, Owen! >=20 > I concur. >=20 > Is anything the ISP could avoid =08to alleviate this occurrence, or is = it entirely a 'server-side' issue to resolve? >=20 > Pete >=20 >=20 >> On 4/01/2016, at 8:42 pm, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote: >>=20 >> As I understand it, the problem being discussed is an oscillation = that is created when the reaction occurs faster than the feedback = resulting in a series of dynamically increasing overcompensations. >>=20 >> Owen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |