Re: [conex] Accounting of ConEx signals

[John Leslie <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kuehlewind <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I agree with you and Richard that usually it shouldn't make a big
> difference, but...
> 
>>> In TCP if a packet get lost (with SACK) we only know how many
>>> payload got lost. We do not know the number of packets/headers
>>> that were used to transmit this data. If we would lose one big
>>> packet and then retransmit a large number of small packets instead
>>> (which are all ConEx marked) that might give quite a different
>>> ConEx signal.
>>
>>    (That's not an unreasonable case.)

   (But it is yet another case where the sender may be unaware, and
the receiver almost certainly will be unaware, of the packet overhead.)

> ... we have to consider those kind on cases if there might be a
> disadvantage or an advantage or even the possible to cheat the
> policing system for some users.

   I'd prefer we _didn't_ invite random middleboxes to police senders
they think are abusing the system. It's not necessary to the information
flow, and experience shows it becomes a game of whack-a-mole. :^(

--
John Leslie <[e-mail]>