IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ledbat] INIT_CWND and MIN_CWND (WAS Re: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08.txt)

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Thu, 20 October 2011 20:29 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC6B11E8090 for <ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6rsV0MCHmhcq for <ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu (darkstar.isi.edu [128.9.128.127]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00D311E807F for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:29:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.166] (abc.isi.edu [128.9.160.166]) (authenticated bits=0) by darkstar.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9KKSJFr007192 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4EA08463.6060208@isi.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:28:19 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
References: <mailman.154.1319050820.6601.ledbat@ietf.org> <DBB1DC060375D147AC43F310AD987DCC42D5AEBA11@ESESSCMS0366.eemea.ericsson.se> <4EA05A79.7080700@isi.edu> <4EA06532.8040204@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4EA06532.8040204@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>, "jana.iyengar@gmail.com" <jana.iyengar@gmail.com>, "ledbat@ietf.org" <ledbat@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ledbat] INIT_CWND and MIN_CWND (WAS Re: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08.txt)
X-BeenThere: ledbat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list of the LEDBAT WG <ledbat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ledbat>, <mailto:ledbat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ledbat>
List-Post: <mailto:ledbat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ledbat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ledbat>, <mailto:ledbat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 20:29:06 -0000

On 10/20/2011 11:15 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
>
>
> On 20/10/2011 18:29, Joe Touch wrote:
>>
>> On 10/19/2011 10:21 PM, Ingemar Johansson S wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Change of subject name.
>>> I have no strong opinion on this but I would like to ask how likely
>>> it is that LEDBAT is used for shortlived flows in the first place.
>>
>> INIT_CWND comes into play during any restart, e.g., after a gap in the
>> offered load.
>>
> Is that the "restart window" (RW) in TCP?

Yes.

Per RFC 2581:

    For the purposes of this standard, we define RW = IW.

LEDBAT doesn't do otherwise, so that's why I've been assuming the same.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email