[AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-floyd-tcpm-ackcc-05.txt to Informational RFC
"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Thu, 04 June 2009 10:53 UTC
Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B902E28C2A4; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 03:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.516
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 YuQyD+e-hAJn; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 03:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED293A6C16; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 03:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.41,305,1241409600"; d="scan'208";a="172901076"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 04 Jun 2009 06:53:00 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 04 Jun 2009 06:53:00 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:52:41 +0200
Message-ID: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A040175772B@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-floyd-tcpm-ackcc-05.txt to Informational RFC
Thread-Index: AcnlAdUPMdhx8wHmSXCAk/2FtfAJDwAAItvA
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org, ops-dir@ietf.org
Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-floyd-tcpm-ackcc-05.txt to Informational RFC
X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List <aaa-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors>, <mailto:aaa-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aaa-doctors>
List-Post: <mailto:aaa-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:aaa-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors>, <mailto:aaa-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 10:53:04 -0000
A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-floyd-tcpm-ackcc-05.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary Technical Summary This document describes a possible congestion control mechanism for acknowledgement traffic (ACKs) in TCP. The document specifies an end-to-end acknowledgement congestion control mechanism for TCP that uses participation from both TCP hosts, the TCP data sender and the TCP data receiver. This acknowledgement congestion control mechanism is being specified for further evaluation by the network community. Working Group Summary (This document is an independent submission to the RFC Editor.) Document Quality (This document is an independent submission to the RFC Editor.) Personnel Lars Eggert (lars.eggert@nokia.com) reviewed this document for the IESG. RFC Editor Note The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG TCPM, but this does not prevent publishing. IESG Note The content of this RFC was at one time considered by the IETF, and therefore it may resemble a current IETF work in progress or a published IETF work. This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard. The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for any purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish is not based on IETF review for such things as security, congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed protocols. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at its discretion. Readers of this RFC should exercise caution in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment. See RFC 3932 for more information.
- [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-floyd-tcpm-ac… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)