[e2e] Reasons not to deply TCP BIC/Cubic

Michael Welzl michawe at ifi.uio.no
Wed Nov 30 03:56:46 PST 2011

This should really go to ICCRG, I'd say (added to recipients). May I ask 
to continue this (interesting!) discussion there?

On 11/30/11 12:10 PM, mascolo at poliba.it wrote:
> Dear all,
> we know that TCP BIC/Cubic is default in Linux and as a consequence 
> 50% of servers employs TCP BIC/Cubic.
> Our measurements say that there could be reasons not to deploy TCP 
> BIC/Cubic. These reasons  are in our opinion rooted in its more 
> aggressive probing phase. In particular, in common network conditions, 
> TCP BIC/CUBIC exhibits: 1. a larger RTT average wrt to TCP NewReno or 
> TCP Westwood+; 2. a larger number of retransmission wrt to TCP NewReno 
> or TCP Westwood+; 3 larger throughput but same goodput wrt to TCP 
> NewReno or Westwood+.
> In other terms, it seems that its more aggressive probing increases 
> both throughput and retransmissions but leaving unchanged the goodput. 
> This is  neutral for the users but negative for the network.
> I appreciate your views.
> Thanks for the attention and best regards,
> Saverio Mascolo
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list