[e2e] Reacting to corruption based loss
detlef.bosau at web.de
Sun Jun 26 15:07:52 PDT 2005
> Now to the question: "Why couldn´t we continue to assume loss free links?"
O.k, this remark was intendedly somewhat teasing ;-)
And of course it was thought in a "TCP manner", i.e. the assumption that
all losses are due to congestion and therefore are treated like
I´m personally interested in wide area mobile wireless networks ("mobile
networks") used as access networks to the Internet. In this model,
the Internet _core_ consists of wirebound networks and mobile networks
are used as _access_ networks only.
For this particular case I advocate the use of PEP to make loss
differentiation for TCP unnecessary.
So, correctly I should say: In the particular case of using mobile
wireless networks as access networks to the Internet, we can compensate
corruption based loss at the access network by the use of PEP/RLP/... to
that degree that a TCP sender may continue to reckognize any loss as
being due to congestion.
Of course, not all protocols are TCP. And of course different protocols
may require different strategies.
However, I´m not quite sure whether my position meets the general
consensus. I´ve earned both, strong support and strong criticism when I
this to colleagues.
Mail: detlef.bosau at web.de
Mobile: +49 172 681 9937
More information about the end2end-interest