North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: TCP and WAN issue

  • From: Roland Dobbins
  • Date: Tue Mar 27 16:42:23 2007
  • Authentication-results: sj-dkim-8; [email protected]; dkim=pass ( sig from verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1181; t=1175027815; x=1175891815; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim8002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;; [email protected]; z=From:=20Roland=20Dobbins=20<[email protected]> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20TCP=20and=20WAN=20issue |Sender:=20; bh=xe3n4o39JBraOV5Y+fqQG1MREKuWhMQGj5CBwdac8XY=; b=eeeKt8+bdu5KkYnZfzTkt/opU+pVDbiiz1pyn6LxbUYwlnzUR4RATyoM6ZAouCKEWHBAWiWf NqrpaGsxv1cmZhkeKmQabI5k5KGWMa7J8CvWxR1ILJzKWTZgPdMN4FNI;

On Mar 27, 2007, at 1:26 PM, Philip Lavine wrote:

inherent in Windows (registry tweaks seem to not functions too well)?

You should certainly look at your MTU and MSS values to ensure there are no difficulties of that sort. Is there any other factor such as perhaps slow DNS server (or other lookup-type services) responses which can be contributing to the perceived slowness? How about tuning the I/O buffers on the relevant routers? Can you tune the I/O buffers on the servers?

And what about your link utilization? Is the DS3 sufficient? Take a look at pps and bps, and take a look at your average packet sizes (NetFlow can help with this). Are your apps sending lots of smaller packets, or are you getting nice, large packet-sizes?

Finally, if none of the above help, you could look at something like SCTP, if your servers and apps support it. But I'd go through the above exercise, first.

Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> // 408.527.6376 voice

Words that come from a machine have no soul.

-- Duong Van Ngo