Re: Clarification on behaviour of Iperf's -w option

[Lawrence Stewart <lstewart --at-- room52.net>]

Hi Marc and users of Iperf,


Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> Comments inline once again.
>
>
> Marc Herbert wrote:

[snip]

> > I'm less affirmative concerning user interface design but I believe 
> > in backward compatibility. I agree that the "too clever" behaviour of 
> > the current -w option is a bit confusing, but it seems to me it still 
> > can be documented correctly. This can even be terse provided it 
> > stands after the new options. Something like this:
> >
> >
> >     -X1
> >          Sets the receive buffer size / maximum TCP window size
> >          [blabla].
> >
> >     -X2
> >          Sets the send buffer size [blabla].
> >
> >     -w
> >         "Magic" buffer size: sizes the receive buffer on the receiver,
> >          and the send buffer on the sender.
>
> I think this sounds like a good compromise :)
>
> Leave -w behaviour as is, add 2 new options and document all 3 options 
> appropriately.
[snip]


I've finally found a spare minute to make the changes to the patch. It
can be downloaded from:

http://caia.swin.edu.au/urp/newtcp/tools.html

The new "-j" and "-k" switches set the socket send and receive buffers
respectively, and the "-w" switch has been left functionally intact but
renamed to the "--wizard" socket buffer tuning option. The "-w" switch,
if specified, negates the effects of the "-j" and "-k" switches if they
are also specified.

Further details about the patch and how to apply it can be found in the
README which is included with the patch distribution.

Feedback on the patch is welcomed.

Cheers,
Lawrence

http://caia.swin.edu.au