🚀 go-pugleaf

OK...I pulled packet traces from the top five sites.  The results were
more
difficult to analyze than I expected:


I'll post details later, but here's some observations:

* Only 3/5 main sites (holding homepage) supported SACK
(basically irrelevant since homepage itself is not intensive)

* All secondary "image" servers (which home page references) 
had SACK enabled

* Here's an interesting one: NONE of the ad servers referenced
by home page supported SACK...damn ads!

* My mail server (tzo.com) doesn't support SACK

John Navas wrote:
> 
> [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable; PLEASE REPLY THERE]
> 
> http://www.mediametrix.com/data/thetop.jsp
> 
> In <3A44E4F4.6E7B3C4C@mynetwatchman.com>, Lawrence Baldwin
> <baldwinl@mynetwatchman.com> wrote:
> 
> >Someone propose 5 top download sites (e.g. download.com) and I'll
> >check them with my Sniffer to see if SACKs are enabled on the server
> >side.
> 
> >John Navas wrote:
> 
> >> The problems are that (1) SACK is negotiated with each connection
> >> [remote host] and (2) not all remote hosts support SACK.  Thus it may
> >> not be used even if the user has it enabled.
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas     <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
>      CABLE MODEM/DSL GUIDE:  <http://Cable-DSL.home.att.net/>

-- 
-------------------------
Lawrence Baldwin
Protocol Scientist
678-624-0924
http://www.mynetwatchman.com - Attack Response System
http://www.mynetwatchman.com/outage/outagereg.htm -  Bellsouth OutAge
Reporting System