[e2e] Reacting to corruption based loss

[Detlef Bosau]

Ian McDonald wrote:
>>Should we treat path with corruption loss larger than, say, 80 % with
>>e2e-means, e.g. CETEN? Or should we, in case those corruption loss
>>occurs on a mobile access line to the Internet, make use of proxies
>>here?
>>
>>I´m just curious and unsafe about the "common" position.
> 
> 
> My personal opinion, for what it is worth, with that much loss you
> definitely do not want to run Reno. I would use Westwood as a bare
> minimum and if I had control of both ends I would consider customising
> the IP stack.
> 
> Ian McDonald
> WAND Network Research
> http://www.wand.net.nz

To my understandig, Westwood would alleviate the congestion control 
problem. (I´m just curious: Has CETEN been compared to Westwood?) But 
what about the high number of retransmissions?

DB

-- 
Detlef Bosau
Galileistrasse 30
70565 Stuttgart
Mail: detlef.bosau at web.de
Web: http://www.detlef-bosau.de
Mobile: +49 172 681 9937