Re: Some comments on the draft of 3448/TFRC.bis (Feb 2007)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I would also like to see RFC3448bis include Faster Restart.  However, the two specs serve different purposes and have different "half-lives".  RFC3448bis is being pushed towards quick publication as Proposed Standard, I believe.  FR is not suitable for that track.  Which will leave us in the unfortunate situation of the main implementations *still* depending on multiple drafts, despite the TFRC update.  Not sure how I feel about that.

Of course, the underlying TCP congestion control mechanisms (slow-start,
congestion avoidance, ECN, retransmit timers, SACK blocks, initial windows,
etc.) are not all contained in a single RFC either.  And they are not static, but
are in flux.   Personally, I would say that this is a sign of a healthy congestion 
control mechanism, that it changes and is refined as our experience with
it grows, and as it is studied in increasing diverse environments (e.g.,
levels of link bandwidth and of stat mux, application characteristics, types of 
links, etc.)

So my guess is that a TFRC that is completely specified in a single stable
RFC is likely to be a sign of a dead congestion control mechanism.
Unfortunately for those of us who are trying to wrap up various pieces of 
old work.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux DCCP]     [IETF Annouce]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [DDR & Rambus]

  Powered by Linux