search for: rfc896

On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 09:04:03AM +0100, Ricardo Galli wrote: > Sorry, didn't explain well. > > Nagle's algorithm (rfc896) buffers user data until there is no pending acks > or it can send a full segment (rfc1122). > > icecast doesn't need it at all, because it already sends large buffers and > the time to send the next buffers is relatively very long. IMO we should be using the nagle algorithm....

On 24/02/02 05:02, Jack Moffitt shaped the electrons to say: > > - The server didn't check for the status of the client's socket before > > the unblocking send(). This caused a disconnection at a minimun network > > congestion, causing a broken pipe error (Linux 2.4 behaviour?) in the > > network. I've just added a poll in sock.c.> > Can you send me this

...ve had varying success with the > > advanced socket options. > > Turn the Nagle algorithm off, so there it doesn't introduce delays > (although it can generate more messages). Should be tested in severeal > conditions. Sorry, didn't explain well. Nagle's algorithm (rfc896) buffers user data until there is no pending acks or it can send a full segment (rfc1122). icecast doesn't need it at all, because it already sends large buffers and the time to send the next buffers is relatively very long. <p> -- ricardo "I just stopped using Windows and now...