[e2e] Packet dropping (Khaled Elsayed)

Arjuna Sathiaseelan arjuna at erg.abdn.ac.uk
Wed May 2 23:00:02 PDT 2007

My belief is as Craig said, for real-time packets - dropping the oldest
packet would be the best solution - so it would be better to drop from the
front of the queue, as most of the real-time packets (VoIP,
videoconferencing) would be carried on UDP or DCCP - which do not require
transport layer retransmissions. We need to note dropping real-time packets
such as VoIP packets (carried by UDP or DCCP) would be more of a concern to
the application layer rather than the transport layer.

But for non-real time applications running over TCP - then I would prefer to
see the new packet being dropped rather the oldest packet - as it would be a
burden to the transport layer - since the transport layer has to buffer up
all the out of order packets!



Message: 2
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 06:33:08 -0400
From: Craig Partridge <craig at aland.bbn.com>
Subject: Re: [e2e] Packet dropping
To: Khaled Elsayed <kelsayed at gmail.com>
Cc: end2end-interest at postel.org
Message-ID: <20070502103308.0E521123842 at aland.bbn.com>

For non-real time, the answer I believe is drop the new packet.

Dropping the earlier packet (assuming the earlier packet has a lower
sequence number) is more likely to slow effective delivery of data
to the recipient and require a more complex set of retransmissions to
recover from.


More information about the end2end-interest mailing list