1294RE: NewReno and the 2001 Revision
- Sep 11, 1998I would like to see this bug fix (multiple cwnd reductions in a single
window) included. It seems to me that the TCPSAT guys are spending lots of
time and effort trying to keep their pipes full, and backing off by half in
a single window of data (when we built this up at one segment per window of
data) is already aggressive congestion avoidance - agressive enough to avoid
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Allman [SMTP:mallman@...]
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 1998 8:07 AM
> To: tcp-impl@...
> Cc: Vern Paxson
> Subject: NewReno and the 2001 Revision
> We would like to hear some feedback on what sorts of loss recovery
> mechanisms the working group thinks are appropriate for inclusion in
> the revision of RFC 2001. As Sally outlined in Chicago, there are
> several improvements we can make to Reno style TCP (i.e., TCP
> without SACK).
> Our current opinion is that some form of the NewReno changes (as was
> obvious in the meeting, there are a number of permutations of
> NewReno) should be included in a seperate experimental document.
> However, as Sally outlined in the meeting and it her note to this
> list shortly after, there is also a seperate issue of fixing a
> fairly well known TCP bug (misfeature?). The bug occurs when
> multiple fast retransmits happen for multiple lost segments within a
> window of data and consequently cwnd is halved multiple times for
> one ``congestion event''. We would like to hear comments on whether
> or not such a bug fix should be included in the 2001 revision.
> Mark and Vern
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>