Talk:TCP window scale option

message: can someone give this option some context and elaborate on the purpose and effects this option has?
--MauriceKA 15:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: context

message: I do not understand why a router would interfere with a TCP option. A router is working at layer 3 only, TCP is layer 4. May be NAT, or a statefull firewall could generate problems. --Mircea.Vutcovici 19:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In Utopia, a router would not do anything at all about it, indeed -- consider an ISP's set of routers, they might try to be smart about their users' choices, perhaps to even out bandwidth loads.  It is indeed a question of definition as to what a router is, but most people would not say that a router would even be able to mess up TCP flags, but some do, an claim to be routers, and are widely recognized as such, therefore they are - at least in my opinion - correctly referred to as routers.  --80.217.189.62 01:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

text: It's wrong anyway :) 2.6.8 had scaling enabled, which created problems with broken routers, thus some later version (sorry, don't know right now which one, but the corresponding patch is from 2004-07-06) sets the scaling factor to a sensible default: Just large enough so that the maximum TCP window (3rd value in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_rmem) can be sent (so if that value is 128K, the scaling factor is set to 1 (as 64K*2^1 = 128K)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.10.60.85 (talk) 12:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

text: TCP implementations supporting the window scale option are compatible with TCP implementations which do not support the window scale option.  However, there have been reports of cases where some devices, usually consumer grade home routers or firewalls, interact poorly with the TCP window scale option [1] [2].  In such circumstances, one can either fix the broken router or disable the TCP window scaling option on the computer.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.162.225.209 (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Router at level 4 in the OSI model? 

message: Giving such prominent to broken consumer-grade broadband routers performs a disservice to non-technical user.  Note that citation 1 is simply a special case of the problem described in citation 2.  Also, any device that properly implements the required portions of the TCP RFC's won't have an issue with tcp window scaling.
I suggest either deleting this section or replacing it with text such as:
:TCP implementations supporting the window scale option are compatible with TCP implementations which do not support the window scale option.  However, there have been reports of cases where some devices, usually consumer grade home routers or firewalls, interact poorly with the TCP window scale option [1] [2].  In such circumstances, one can either fix the broken router or disable the TCP window scaling option on the computer.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.162.225.209 (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible side affects overblown 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on TCP window scale option. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080101144824/http://msdn2.microsoft.com:80/en-us/library/ms819736.aspx to http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819736.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:04, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified