[e2e] Question about RFC 2581

[Mark Allman]

> Thus, the more ACK segments, the greater the n and the greater the sum
> part of the equation. If I derived this right, then the difference is
> quite significant to me. However, this is the way it should not be
> implemented, I hope.

Right.  We are on the same page, I think.

My own opinion is that congestion avoidance should be implemented using
byte counting and that 1 SMSS should be added to cwnd after cwnd bytes
have been ACKed.  That is allowed in the current RFC.  

In the revision, should this scheme be not only allowed but encouraged?
I only see advantages (mostly in terms of security) of this, not
disadvantages.  (The only disadvantage that really comes to mind is that
a touch more state must be kept... basically how much data has been
ACKed since we last bumped the cwnd.)

I'd love to hear opinions on this. 

allman


--
Mark Allman -- ICIR -- http://www.icir.org/mallman/



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20050105/efe1ab66/attachment.bin