Let me be more clear: the first feedback packet after an idle period. I guess we ignore it? -Arjuna On 9/24/06, Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna.sathiaseelan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Eddie, Thanks for your reply. No, the first feedback is sent with a very low receiver rate. Do we ignore that feedback packet? -Arjuna On 9/24/06, Eddie Kohler <kohler@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Arjuna > > Clarifying question. Do you mean that the first feedback packet is sent > containing no estimate of receiver rate? Because it's sent in response to > only one packet? > > Eddie > > > Arjuna Sathiaseelan wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > I am in the process of updating the DCCP CCID3 ns-2 code, and would > > like to know what do we do with the FIRST feedback packet. Do we > > ignore it or do we increase the sending rate X by 2*X without > > considering the receiver rate X_recv? Increasing it by 2*X seems to > > give an aggressive behaviour. > > > > "If (sender has been idle or data-limited) > > min_rate = max(2*X_recv, W_init/R); > > Else > > min_rate = 2*X_recv; > > If (p > 0) > > Calculate X_calc using the TCP throughput equation. > > X = max(min(X_calc, min_rate), s/t_mbi); > > Else if (not the first feedback packet, and > > not the first feedback packet after a nofeedback timer) > > If (t_now - tld >= R) > > X = max(min(2*X, min_rate), s/R); > > tld = t_now;" > > > > > > > > > -- Dr.Arjuna Sathiaseelan Electronics Research Group University of Aberdeen Aberdeen AB24 3UE Web: www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/arjuna Phone : +44-1224-272780 Fax : +44-1224-272497
-- Dr.Arjuna Sathiaseelan Electronics Research Group University of Aberdeen Aberdeen AB24 3UE Web: www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/arjuna Phone : +44-1224-272780 Fax : +44-1224-272497
