[e2e] Are Packet Trains / Packet Bursts a Problem in TCP?
detlef.bosau at web.de
Fri Sep 29 17:44:11 PDT 2006
Fred Baker wrote:
> I certainly encouraged Sally et al to publish RFC 3168, and yes I
> would agree that something other than a loss-triggered approach has
> real value, especially at STM-n speeds where the difference between
> "nominal delay due to queuing" and "loss" is pretty sharp.
Does somebody happen to know, whether there is some literature on this?
> I don't think I would pick "50%"; it would be at a higher rate.
Of course. And I´m not sure whether there exists one such "load
threshold" for all cases. But I could imagine that suitable values can
be found particularly for backbone lines where the traffic pattern is
perhaps pretty well known and predictable.
More information about the end2end-interest