[e2e] Reacting to corruption based loss
sampad_m at rediffmail.com
Mon Jun 27 07:35:08 PDT 2005
Though not an expert however I have something to say...
Craig Partridge wrote:
> In message <42BDDD74.BF9FDB92 at web.de>, Detlef Bosau writes:
> >Basically, we´re talking about the old loss differentiation debate. If
> >packet loss is due to corruption, e.g. on a wireless link, there is not
> >mecessarily a need for the sender to decrease it´s rate. Perhaps one
> >could do some FEC or use robust codecs, depending on the application in
> >use. But I do not see a reason for a sender to decrease it´s rate
As we know packet loss (due to corruption) is significant in wireless and is mainly due to fading when their is shift from 1 AP to another . I think it would be better if the sender decreases the rate rather than sending data at the same rate considering the fact that data will be lost...
I mean their is no point losing more amount of data by continuing to send data at the same rate when we know that packets are getting corrupted.
So I think its not much of a worry if sender reacts to a corruption like congestion for some cases atleast for the time being, till we find the reason for corruption and react accordingly.... Main point is to find the reason for corruption then react accordingly.
Any way link layer also has its recovery mechanism...
TCP fast retransmit can also sort this problem in some sense( not very much sure)...
Kindly make me aware if their r some mistakes in my thoughts... :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the end2end-interest