From 5eda1e0031c58489ddd318b94dd1a341a2e37194 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: str4d Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 04:29:50 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] JavaDoc paragraphs --- .../net/i2p/client/streaming/impl/ConnectionOptions.java | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/apps/streaming/java/src/net/i2p/client/streaming/impl/ConnectionOptions.java b/apps/streaming/java/src/net/i2p/client/streaming/impl/ConnectionOptions.java index 84a94a3e7..153b30c7e 100644 --- a/apps/streaming/java/src/net/i2p/client/streaming/impl/ConnectionOptions.java +++ b/apps/streaming/java/src/net/i2p/client/streaming/impl/ConnectionOptions.java @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ class ConnectionOptions extends I2PSocketOptionsImpl { * clearly from the math above that was not correct. * (Before 0.6.2, the reply leaseSet was bundled with every message, so it didn't even * fit in TWO tunnel messages - more like 2 1/3) - * + *

* Now, it's not clear how often we will get the ideal situation (no reply leaseSet bundling, * no key bundling, and especially not having a small message ahead of you, which will then cause * fragmentation for all subsequent messages until the queue is emptied - BatchedPreprocessor @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ class ConnectionOptions extends I2PSocketOptionsImpl { * messages in a new stream are much larger due to the leaseSet and key bundling. * But for long-lived streams (like with i2psnark) this should pay dividends. * The tunnel.batch* stats should provide some data for test comparisons. - * + *

* As MTU and MRU are identical and are negotiated to the lowest value * for the two ends, you can't do widespread testing of a higher value. * Unless we change to allow MTU and MRU to be different, @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ class ConnectionOptions extends I2PSocketOptionsImpl { * So let's try 1730 for release 0.6.5. This will allow for 738 testing as well, * with i2p.streaming.maxMessageSize=738 (in configadvanced.jsp, or in i2ptunnel, or * i2psnark, for example). - * + *

* Not that an isolated single packet is very common, but * in this case, 960 was 113.3% total overhead. * Compared to 738 (38.8% overhead) and 1730 (18.4%).