[e2e] TCP Loss Differentiation

Detlef Bosau detlef.bosau at web.de
Sun Feb 22 03:08:44 PST 2009

Injong Rhee wrote:
> Perhaps I might add on this thread. Yes. I agree that it is not so 
> clear that we have a model for non-congestion related losses. The 
> motivation for this differentiation is, I guess, to disregard 
> non-congestion related losses for TCP window control. So the 
> motivation is valid. But maybe we should look at the problem from a 
> different perspective. Instead of trying to detect non-congestion 
> losses, why not try to detect congestion losses? 

I did not follow the entire thread yet, but I think you miss the problem.

The problem is not how to detect congestion losses. In the thread, ECN 
is mentioned, perhaps other mechanisms as well.

The problem is how to react properly upon packet loss?

Particularly: how do we react properly upon an _individual_ packet loss? 
When should a packet be disregarded for congeston control?
On a statistical basis, there is an approach: the CETEN work by Alman 
and Eddy. But can a reliable loss differentiation on an e-2-e basis be 
achieved for individual packet?

Detlef Bosau                          Mail:  detlef.bosau at web.de
Galileistrasse 30                     Web:   http://www.detlef-bosau.de
70565 Stuttgart                       Skype: detlef.bosau
Mobile: +49 172 681 9937

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3351 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20090222/90f86e4c/smime.bin

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list