Re: TCP RFC 6298 RTO handling

[Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling%kev009.com@localhost>]

On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 11:43 AM Nick Hudson <nick.hudson%gmx.co.uk@localhost> wrote:
>
> 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

Committed, thanks!

>
> > 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
>