[e2e] Are we doing sliding window in the Internet?

Lloyd Wood L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk
Wed Jan 3 17:57:05 PST 2007

At Wednesday 03/01/2007 16:36 -0800, Joe Touch wrote:

>*** Status:   Good Signature from Invalid Key
>*** Alert:    Please verify signer's key before trusting signature.
>*** Signer:   Joe Touch <touch at isi.edu> (0x89A766BB)
>*** Signed:   04/01/2007 00:36:02
>*** Verified: 04/01/2007 01:24:20
>Lloyd Wood wrote:
>> At Wednesday 03/01/2007 14:46 -0800, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>> The point is that if *everyone* used QuickACKs, short transfers would
>>>> be faster, with almost no harm done to long flows.
>>> If you believe that's true, please present some verification. An
>>> implementation based on an assertion is insufficient.
>> And yet everyone is expected to implement based on the simple MUST
>> and SHOULD assertions in RFCs, given without explanation.
>> Which is, as you say, insufficient.
>It should be insufficient to get those words into an RFC without
>evidence that they are appropriate. RFCs are neither the sole nor
>necessarily the appropriate place for that information; they can and
>should cite published work that validates their claims. 

Such citations would be informational rather than normative, and therefore optional.

Informational references tend to get left out of RFCs.

>Whether we
>should trust the IETF to do that is independent of whether we should
>ignore them solely for the benefit of individual performance.
>Joe Touch
>Sr. Network Engineer, USAF TSAT Space Segment

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list