Re: types of traffic in tcp congest control

J Wu <jinw@comp.leeds.ac.uk> Mon, 13 May 2002 15:47 UTC

X-Authentication-Warning: cslin135.leeds.ac.uk: jinw owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 16:47:44 +0100 (BST)
From: J Wu <jinw@comp.leeds.ac.uk>
X-X-Sender: <jinw@cslin135.leeds.ac.uk>
To: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=B4=F3=C0=EE?= <liy666@sina.com>, <tcp-impl@lerc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: types of traffic in tcp congest control
In-Reply-To: <3CDF481C.7000709@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0205131624560.30118-100000@cslin135.leeds.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-tcp-impl@grc.nasa.gov
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1269
Lines: 40

On Sun, 12 May 2002, Joe Touch wrote:

>
>
> J Wu wrote:
> > Hi Li,
> ...
> >
> > As my understanding of S.Low's paper that the mice stands for small scale
> > transmition with delay sensitive and the elephant stands for large scale
> > transmition. The small scale transmitions will not cause any congestion,
> > but the large scale transmitions will.
>
> That is an assumption, one which other results, notably of bandwidth
> limited highly-shared core links (e.g., the US-UK link) refute. They
> indicate that mice can indeed cause congestion amongst themselves, even
> in the absence of elephants.
>
> Joe

Hi Joe,
Well, if only the mice can still congest the link, which shows that the
network resources are under severe shortage. The only way to solve under
this situation is hardware solution. But I think even under this situation
restrict the elephants will also do benefit to alleviate the stage of
congestion.

And also, it seems that most network congestions are take place at access
network which is not the core network.


Another question maybe far from this topic: As the invent of new core
transmission techniques like DWDM, is congestion control still needed in
core network?

-- 
Jin Wu
School of Computing,
University of Leeds.
Tel: +44 113 2336806