Re: [6lowapp] Where does TCP not work

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Tue, 03 November 2009 06:06 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6lowapp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowapp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E61AE3A697A for <6lowapp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:06:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DnPHfOoXcwb4 for <6lowapp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:06:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C99BB3A67D2 for <6lowapp@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:06:33 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAMpX70qrR7Ht/2dsb2JhbADFIJc7hD0E
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,672,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="220554835"
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Nov 2009 06:06:54 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nA366sdG003042; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:06:54 GMT
Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:06:54 -0800
Received: from [192.168.4.177] ([10.99.9.18]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:06:52 -0800
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: <d.sturek@att.net>
In-Reply-To: <005c01ca5a86$9a3f2ef0$cebd8cd0$@sturek@att.net>
Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org
References: <5A85AE5A-4C5D-4A0F-8CDF-BEB4C69FF002@cisco.com> <005c01ca5a86$9a3f2ef0$cebd8cd0$@sturek@att.net>
Message-Id: <DEF214D0-1324-493C-B855-E0A2018658A7@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 23:06:51 -0700
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Nov 2009 06:06:53.0199 (UTC) FILETIME=[D6F259F0:01CA5C4B]
Cc: 6lowapp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6lowapp] Where does TCP not work
X-BeenThere: 6lowapp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Application protocols for constrained nodes and networks <6lowapp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp>, <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowapp>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowapp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp>, <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 06:06:35 -0000

Makes sense, but I suspect that solving this type of problem is a bit  
outside of something we would do in the Apps area - seems like a an  
issues where you would want the type of expertise of a a WG in the  
transport area. Would it make sense to say something like today we  
need to run over TCP (and/or UDP) and in the future needs to be able  
to run over new transport protocols?


On Oct 31, 2009, at 6:02 PM, Don Sturek wrote:

> Hi Cullen,
>
> Sorry, I meant to provide some references on this issue.  Basically,  
> here is
> the problem:
> 1)  TCP was written back in the day when Ethernet was the primary  
> transport.
> One key assumption made in TCP was that packet timeout was related to
> congestion.  TCP reacts to packet timeouts by adjusting the transmit  
> timing
> and using back off.
> 2)  Wireless networks (especially mesh topologies) experience packet  
> loss as
> a result of failure of the RF link.  Note that IEEE 802.11 does not
> typically exhibit this type of loss.  The reason is that for IEEE  
> 802.11
> (actually WiFi) the last hop wireless link from the AP can be  
> guaranteed via
> MAC level acknowledges and retries.  The trouble with mesh links is  
> that
> link errors are not propagated and, even if they are, result in route
> re-establishment which violates the TCP timeout on the far end and  
> starts
> the "congestion management" procedure in TCP (which actually makes the
> problem worse as some of the links below indicate).
>
> I am not saying categorically that TCP does not work for wireless  
> links.  I
> am saying that for many wireless links, TCP does not work well (and  
> in some
> extreme cases, at all).  Here are some examples from the IETF  
> archives and
> other industry trials......
>
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4653.txt
> http://www.sics.se/~adam/ewsn2004.pdf
> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=686057
>
> I used to have a more exhaustive reference list but I think if you  
> do a
> search you will see this is a long standing problem....
>
> Don
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 6lowapp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:6lowapp-bounces@ietf.org] On  
> Behalf
> Of Cullen Jennings
> Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 10:33 AM
> To: 6lowapp@ietf.org
> Subject: [6lowapp] Where does TCP not work
>
>
> Multiple people have told me that TCP won't work on some of the types
> of networks we want to run on. Anyway I'd like to understand a bit
> more on why this is.
>
> I could go dig a 9600 baud modem out of my closet, set the MTU at 100,
> and emulate 10% packet loss on server side and go try some things. I'm
> relatively confidently TCP, HTTP, pop, imap, SSH, and TLS will all
> work just fine.
>
> So, what are the network conditions that we think are going to cause a
> problem for TCP? and, what might one do to make something that worked
> better than TCP in these cases.
>
> Thanks, Cullen
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6lowapp mailing list
> 6lowapp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp
>