On Fri Sep 1 22:29:01 2023 +0000, Paul Gofman wrote:
As for my original test in the patch, I think it shows that without my changes setting short receive buffer length breaks things *even* on a loopback interface and makes no sense (even though the ultimate details may be different on real network interface).
Sorry, I think I was failing to think through things properly. Let me start over, and try to understand the problem.
So the observation is that Windows *will* drop packets that overflow the buffer size, but internally the buffer size is capped to some minimum value regardless of the value of SO_RCVBUF?
And we know that said minimum value is the same as the initial value of SO_RCVBUF, at least on 8+?
If I understand this all correctly: should we be trying to clamp our internal SO_RCVBUF to that value on Windows, instead of whatever the initial value of Unix SO_RCVBUF happens to be?