Re: [ledbat] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08.txt

Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Sat, 15 October 2011 08:56 UTC

Return-Path: <arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com>
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 E425821F8A7D for <ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 jT0sYcuF8RhO for <ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D3B21F8A6C for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qadb12 with SMTP id b12so1717411qad.31 for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ndnx/mxjstPY03QjT2feGm8MJ6JUzoGHA2ktprzcQtQ=; b=ojzY3pjNig0Y6pocACaXh2ETNiMzIe/COl0Amn0rGbg4PSiHAhsddKilKQQ8N7Sacf VX9o9B1YJohmAOnN7rC2CCrinconSxF4eaHwFMlideS9Mhzlcu+5CuVeHhrJ2pjmcVKe jZHzEuRLjSL/cb6XxmRMJdDoSR8qZAsHL11cI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.51.137 with SMTP id d9mr2544609qcg.61.1318669009312; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com
Received: by 10.229.224.69 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPaG1A=9Znd+MwH6Eac5BMe21cVhBAhDxJrWiBh4cJ737ahfWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E92338F.1030601@fandm.edu> <CAPaG1Ak0WkBqc=8ReywoKQEW_GPAtyiLGK0E29npYq7r+D+E3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAPaG1A=9Znd+MwH6Eac5BMe21cVhBAhDxJrWiBh4cJ737ahfWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:56:49 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: JtBEEVMiOYa2EKAWtK8iJNHWSIQ
Message-ID: <CAPaG1AmBkER8VZCkAGytBLntJUD5wcKtFaP7zuRh+26suK+JNA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
To: janardhan.iyengar@fandm.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: ledbat@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ledbat] Fwd: 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: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:56:51 -0000

Another thing which I forgot to point out - in section 3.4.1 the term
off_target suddenly pops up without an explanation. That needs to be
resolved please.

Regards
Arjuna


On 15 October 2011 09:37, Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
> Dear Jana and others,
>
>  I went through the draft and am currently trying to figure out what
> the performance implications are with the latest draft through
> simulations (I have a few helpful UG students in India who have
> volunteered to do this for me - this includes modifying the current
> ns-2 code to reflect the latest draft). But unfortunately, I dont
> think we will be able to tell anything useful before WGLC ends!
>
> However I have one question ->
>  " A CTO is used to detect heavy congestion indicated by loss of all
>   outstanding data or acknowledgments, resulting in reduction of the
>   cwnd to 1 MSS and an exponential backoff of the CTO interval"
>
> So I am trying to see  whether heavy congestion actually means loss of
> "ALL" outstanding segments - so how does LEDBAT behave according to
> the current draft if atleast one packet went through? Just trying to
> understand.
>
> Regards
> Arjuna
>
> On 10 October 2011 00:51, Janardhan Iyengar <jana.iyengar@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> A new version of the congestion control draft is in the repository. There
>> are two major mods in this revision:
>>
>> 1/ WGLC identified one major issue that needed to be addressed in the LEDBAT
>> congestion control draft -- LEDBAT response to extreme congestion -- and
>> we've tried to address that issue in this revision. We've added a new
>> mechanism, the Congestion Timeout (CTO), for a sender to respond to extreme
>> congestion. We do not specify how this should be implemented, but we do note
>> that a CTO can be implemented with or without a timer. In terms of textual
>> changes, we've added an update_CTO() function and a branch for what to do if
>> no acks are received within a CTO amount of time in Section 3.4.2. We have
>> changed the response to data loss to ensure that a protocol, such as TCP,
>> that uses the same timer for both congestion control and for
>> retransmissions, changes its cwnd correctly.
>>
>> 2/ We have set the values for INIT_CWND to 4 and MIN_CWND to 2, and have
>> clarified the discussion of CURRENT_DELAYS and INIT_CWND/MIN_CWND in Section
>> 3.5.
>>
>> Please comment!
>> - jana
>>
>> --
>> Janardhan Iyengar
>> Assistant Professor, Computer Science
>> Franklin & Marshall College
>> http://www.fandm.edu/jiyengar
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08.txt
>> Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2011 16:33:33 -0700
>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
>> To: jiyengar@fandm.edu
>> CC: jiyengar@fandm.edu, mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de,
>>  greg@bittorrent.com, shalunov@bittorrent.com
>>
>> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08.txt has been
>> successfully submitted by Janardhan Iyengar and posted to the IETF
>> repository.
>>
>> Filename:        draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion
>> Revision:        08
>> Title:           Low Extra Delay Background Transport (LEDBAT)
>> Creation date:   2011-10-09
>> WG ID:           ledbat
>> Number of pages: 19
>>
>> Abstract:
>>   LEDBAT is an experimental delay-based congestion control algorithm
>>   that attempts to utilize the available bandwidth on an end-to-end
>>   path while limiting the consequent increase in queueing delay on the
>>   path.  LEDBAT uses changes in one-way delay measurements to limit
>>   congestion that the flow itself induces in the network.  LEDBAT is
>>   designed for use by background bulk-transfer applications; it is
>>   designed to be no more aggressive than TCP congestion control and to
>>   yield in the presence of any competing flows when latency builds,
>>   thus limiting interference with the network performance of the
>>   competing flows.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The IETF Secretariat
>> _______________________________________________
>> ledbat mailing list
>> ledbat@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ledbat
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://about.me/arjuna.sathiaseelan
>