http://www.dslreports.com/forum/-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23275421 en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:41:19 EDT Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:41:19 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23305064 »/linequality/nil/2583589]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23305064 Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:21:40 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23292409
I've never seen any real benefit from having Time Stamping enabled myself (I have Cable Internet service), but I understand that enabling Time Stamping may be beneficial with High-LATENCY services, such as Satellite (and possibly some Wireless providers...?)

There is No "One Size Fits All" when it comes to setting your RWIN... Using Even Multiples of your MSS (1460 in your case), is recommended for best Efficiency.

Most folks find an RWIN somewhere in the range of (MSS * 44) thru (MSS * 176) to be the "Sweet Spot", but note that having *Too* Large of an RWIN can actually Degrade performance... Start conservatively, and go up from there (I'd suggest MSS * 22 Increments)... When further increasing the RWIN doesn't make much of a difference, Go with the Smallest RWIN that still provides the best speeds.

HTH,

-Tursiops_G.
--
If You're Unsure, "RTFM"... If You're SURE, "RTFM" Anyway. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23292409 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:33:10 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23290383
Lower your RWIN to 18000 and run a couple speed tests and see what you get.

As far as the time stamping goes, I have not seen any measurable speed change one way or the other.
--
"You can observe a lot by watching". Yogi Berra]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23290383 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:49:53 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23288521 Tweaking FAQ »What is the default RWIN setting in Windows XP Home & Pro?
If the values are dynamic and NOT static, isn't this like Vista where the RWIN is dynamically changed? Why would Dr.TCP be needed if this is the case?
UPDATE: »/tweakr/block:···a=normal]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23288521 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 03:44:31 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23288465 /tweakr/block:···a=normal


Speed jumped up somewhat! But that could be any combination of things... time of day... different server... whatever. Page responce time does seem noticably snappier! :o
I guess if you look at the advanced info by clicking on the link below on that page it gives you a better idea?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23288465 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 02:49:12 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23288272 ! :p Okay, I will try changing the RWIN and Time Stamping options. What I still don't fully understand is why time stamping should be disabled with an RWIN higher than 65535?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23288272 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:07:31 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23288253 said by Irish Shark:

Time Stamping:

The need for Time Stamping seems to be in question, at least with RWIN under 65535. If you have a line where latency varies a lot, or a "long fat pipe" (for example, pure satellite connection), then Time Stamping should be beneficial, so experiment with it. Time Stamping "Defaults" to off (same as No).

I just leave it set to default and let The Doctor do what ever it does.
Thanks Irish Shark . I also read the entire FAQ on this.
Since my RWIN is above 65535, that was why I enabled it as per this very recommendation. So you are saying perhaps I should go against the recommendation? DEFAULT = OFF
I'm only curious as from what I understand, the guidelines say you may benefit from having it enabled with an RWIN of 65535+
NOTE: I also re-editted my original post and re-posted my results as my TweakTest has been discarded by the site.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23288253 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:59:23 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23284720 Time Stamping:

The need for Time Stamping seems to be in question, at least with RWIN under 65535. If you have a line where latency varies a lot, or a "long fat pipe" (for example, pure satellite connection), then Time Stamping should be beneficial, so experiment with it. Time Stamping "Defaults" to off (same as No).

I just leave it set to default and let The Doctor do what ever it does.
--
"You can observe a lot by watching". Yogi Berra]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23284720 Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:32:50 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23284649 The reason why I enabled time stamping was because from my understanding... if may help improve packet loss over a long FAT connection? Perhaps I misunderstood. I shall try disabling this and changing the RWIN.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23284649 Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:22:15 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23276813
Your RWIN is a Whole Multiple of your MSS (1460 * 65 = 94900)... Good.

Just for grins, Try an RWIN of 128480 (1460 * 88), and set the RFC1323 Time Stamping setting to OFF (disabled), and see if that offers any further improvement over what you have right now...

-Tursiops_G.
--
If You're Unsure, "RTFM"... If You're SURE, "RTFM" Anyway. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-DrTCP-Tweak-Advice-23276813 Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:18:43 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23275421
UPDATE: »/tweakr/block:···a=normal

This is what I applied and the results the TweakTest has provided. Seems okay?
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/-DrTCP-XP64-Tweak-Advice-23275421 Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:26:24 EDT