[e2e] Question about RFC 2581

[Henderson, Thomas R]

> 
> 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. 
> 

Not all split acks are malevolent.  For example, they are a component
of Cisco's RBSCP implementation.

In fact, I think that one might be able to construct a satellite gateway
that maintained true end-to-end semantics (no byte of data acked before
the true receiver acked it), and also adhered to the principle of not
returning more than one (split) ack for every segment successfully
received at the gateway, and approach the performance of TCP-splitting
gateways.

Tom
(ducking for cover)