In message <Pine.GSO.4.61.0506040325200.20116@rfhpc8317>Hubert Feyrer writes
>On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Jonathan Stone wrote:
>> How about wording like this:
>>
>>   The TCP implementation in
>>   .Nx
>>   includes NewReno (which subsumes the earlier TCP-Reno and
>>   TCP-Tahoe versions), TCP Selective Acknowledgements (SACK,
>>   RFC-2018, rfc-2883), and TCP-Westwood.
>
>OK

Thanks.  We should probably say something about initial flight-size
(rfc2414?) and flight-size (or cwnd size) after a congestion event (or
if you prefer, the initial cwnd size, and cwnd size after congestion).

One of the half-dozen things TCP-Vegas did that got better performance
than Tahoe was an initial cwnd and post-drop cwnd of 2 segments versus
1 segment in TCP-Tahoe.  OTOH, I'd have to go UTSL to check exactly
what we offer.

>> followed by another sentence in the same paragraph, detailing which
>> options are off by default and require sysctls to enable them?
>
>I prefer not to go near that. Our sysctl documentation is a serious mess, 
>and if someone wants to sort that out, that would be very great.
>I.e. for a start, a description of all tcp related sysctls could be put 
>into tcp.4, and then tcp.4 be Xref'd from sysctl.[89], i.e. move 
>documentation of the sysctl knobs to the related topic.
>
>There seems to be quite a few of these knobs, of which I know 0. :(


Fair enough. doing sysctl net.inet.tcp shows... well, to me it looks
like it'd seem a tangled mess to your average sysadmin.