[Iccrg] Re: [tcpm] Review of draft-fairhurst-tcpm-newcwv-03

[[e-mail] (Yuchung Cheng)]

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Joe Touch <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> On 7/16/2012 4:10 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/16/2012 3:56 PM, Yuchung Cheng wrote:
>>>
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>> First of all the problem this draft is trying to solve is important:
>>> AFAIK servers and data-centers disable slow-start after idle because
>>> it simply hurts latency too badly.
>>
>>
>> If they're mostly doing HTTP, it shouldn't matter at all. HTTP's
>> transaction pattern defeats slow-start after idle anyway.
Why not if the interval between two HTTP responses are large, say two minutes?
Your draft below suggested receiving HTTP requests have some effects but
I didn't see that in RFC 2861 (and I couldn't find the mailing list discussion
cited either).

Could you provide an example? Thanks.

>>
>> Joe
>
>
> PS - we did try to deal with this issue a decade ago, but the effort was not
> take up by the WG:
>
> http://www.isi.edu/touch/pubs/draft-hughes-restart-00.txt
>
> Joe
>