Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] queries on draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpimpguide-05.txt

From: "Armando L. Caro Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 13:23:53 -0500 (EST)

Qiaobing,

Sorry for the late reply, but no I do not have any such information.
SCTP's Congestion Window Validation algorithm is based on the one for TCP
presented in RFC2861. As long as the connection is not
application-limited, the algorithm should not be of concern in high
bandwidth*delay pipes. Otherwise, I am not aware of any work which shows a
cwnd validation algorithm which works optimally for idle or
application-limited connections.

~armando

0--                                                  --0
| Armando L. Caro Jr.      |  Protocol Engineering Lab |
| www.cis.udel.edu/~acaro  |    University of Delaware |
0--                                                  --0

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Qiaobing Xie wrote:

> Hi, Armando,
>
> "Armando L. Caro Jr." wrote:
> ....
> > >       Originally, Max.Burst was applied only in the case of a SACK
> > > acknowledging fast retransmitted DATA Chunks. However, Max.Burst is
> > > now used always. Note that this is a modification to the general
> > > congestion control algorithm.
> >
> > Yes, this change was made to avoid bursts at any time. Max.Burst was left
> > as a parameter, because we don't really know what an acceptable burst
> > is... 4 was a reasonable number chosen earlier, so we stuck with it.
>
> Do you have a reference to any analysis/discussion on the impact of this change to
> the data throughput over a long, fat SCTP connection? (or similar analysis for
> long fat TCP connections).

_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg

---

From: "Armando L. Caro Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 13:30:28 -0500 (EST)

oops... I meant to say...

On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Armando L. Caro Jr. wrote:

> application-limited connections over high bandwidth*delay pipes.
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

~armando

0--                                                  --0