TCP throughput?

[Masateru KUWATA]

Guus

Thanks for your advice.

With respect to your comment regarding the congestion, it is very
unlikely because I tested it inside my home network. In addition to that
OpenVPN showed up similar throughput no matter what protocol is used
(TCP/UDP).

Anyway, I will continue to test tinc and report the findings for tinc's
future.

Again, thanks for your prompt and kind response!

Regards

--- "Guus Sliepen" <guus at tinc-vpn.org> ---

>On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:45:15PM +0900, Masateru KUWATA wrote:
>
>> I am testing tinc on Windows and found some interesting behavior.
>> 
>> I used "TCPOnly" parameter for both end because I wanted to go through
>> NAT. However, by using TCPOnly parameter, the response of PING slowed
>> down significantly.
>> 
>> The PING response with UDP is about 4ms, but it bumped up to 2000ms with
>> TCP.
>> 
>> I am just curious whether this is caused by using TCP.
>
>Yes, this is caused by TCP. However, if you consistently get very large
>(>1000ms) ping times, it is probably because there is a lot of congestion
>(maybe there is lots of other traffic on the same network), or a lot of
packet
>loss (bad reception or cable, or a bad ISP).
>
>With tinc 1.0.10 and later, you should not have to use the TCPOnly option
>anymore, since it will now automatically detect whether communication
via UDP
>is possible, and will fall back to TCP when it isn't.
>
>-- 
>Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
>     Guus Sliepen <guus at tinc-vpn.org>


Masateru KUWATA
Computer & Communications Consulting
Phone: 070-5465-6505(Domestic)/+81-70-5465-6505(Oversea）
Mobile mail:masateru_kuwata at wm.pdx.ne.jp
Profile: http://www.geocities.jp/mki_ltd/page002.html
BLOG : http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/mki_ltd/MYBLOG/