Re: TCP RFC 6298 RTO handling

[Nick Hudson <nick.hudson%gmx.co.uk@localhost>]

On 20/05/2026 02:24, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> Versus the LoC, this is a high value change that improves TCP
> performance in common [, tail] loss situations.
> https://www.netbsd.org/~kbowling/tcp-rfc6298.patch

LGTM

> Even on high latency links, 1s is a good long while and a spurious RTO
> may be profitable since links are generally less bandwidth constrained
> while latency is what it is if you are dealing with tail loss in a
> buffering scheme.
> Regards,
> Kevin Bowling