Subject: Re: Squashed Ack, was Re: Concerns about our NewReno code
To: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@dsg.stanford.edu>
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@shagadelic.org>
List: tech-net
Date: 11/08/2004 14:02:58
--Apple-Mail-8--762389047
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On Nov 8, 2004, at 1:53 PM, Jonathan Stone wrote:
> Yes, but if you get packet loss (e. g., due to congestion from
> multiple flows crossing the router onto one or other subnet), then the
> stretch-ACK bug breaks Fast Recovery, and you incur full slow
> timeouts. Which sounds to me more like what Bill was seeing.
Yes, certainly. I was merely explaining stretch-ack because Bill asked
:-)
> Historical note: I seem to recall that back then, NetBSD's TCP would
> actually send one ACK every 3 segments in steady-state; which was
> fixed when you fixed the stretch-ACK bug.
That's certainly possible. You'll forgive me if my memory isn't so
crisp on a 7 year-old event :-)
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@shagadelic.org>
--Apple-Mail-8--762389047
content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453;
name=PGP.sig
content-description: This is a digitally signed message part
content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBj+0SOpVKkaBm8XkRAhpfAJ44miJnOz5AMLww/h0SexlzzIZilgCgmVfM
1hUKfrrk52IGE6YaR07GF6w=
=gR2G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail-8--762389047--