Re: [tcpm] Is this a problem?

MURALI BASHYAM <murali_bashyam@yahoo.com> Mon, 05 November 2007 23:14 UTC

Return-path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IpB9M-0003dN-Pv; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:14:32 -0500
Received: from tcpm by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IpB9L-0003bz-Fo for tcpm-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:14:31 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IpB9L-0003bD-4p for tcpm@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:14:31 -0500
Received: from web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.201.183]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IpB9K-0000We-OU for tcpm@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:14:31 -0500
Received: (qmail 85898 invoked by uid 60001); 5 Nov 2007 23:14:30 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=ATEvre+LnRpvF9kYAhzCqIT/zvzV+WAKBUkTIl19M58BLnYw7XuVwYRgfjHbfO+9qk0wp6uDeUU+KyI6BSwS48p6lrZgdoa8iesX6yR1r+7z0VIgGLqD5qEyuvK6wmRUd9peJfTfjAmDlN2GzTjNxrFRavMyvU93EdDNJZfUv34=;
X-YMail-OSG: qkSN85MVM1loix3qhLXoJcoNDelc1hRAloYMrxPwTMo0H0.AVMRjzxlyacMCgqt8uq4fcuRbHNwPppjbyVzmUMsOZHCGLnBu5wGL5NWwGmmkSQub92raLLiDULbRFQ--
Received: from [69.3.29.18] by web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:14:29 PST
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/814.05 YahooMailWebService/0.7.152
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 15:14:29 -0800 (PST)
From: MURALI BASHYAM <murali_bashyam@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Is this a problem?
To: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>, Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <71199.85889.qm@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org


----- Original Message ----
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
To: Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
Sent: Monday, November 5, 2007 1:27:52 PM
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Is this a problem?




Lloyd Wood wrote:
...
>> Yes, this is a problem for which a variety of solutions exist, and
 for
>> which a coordinated solution would be useful. No, that itself is not
>> justification for assuming TCP is the place to do this.
> 
> try this thought on for size:
> 
> "The need for congestion control is a problem for which a variety of
> solutions exist, and for which a coordinated solution would be
 useful.

I should have said "for which a variety of solutions in a variety of
places - OS, application, API, protocol - exist..."

The primary point is that this isn't owned by communications layers.

The point is that it can be solved in TCP or at the transport layer ALSO. It's as good a place
if not better (from the co-ordination point of view and from the sender state visibility points of view). 
Let me ask the question: Can you elaborate the reasons why doing it in TCP is not a good idea? 
"A variety of solutions in a variety of places" is not a good position to be in, we want the right
solution in the one, correct place, with the least possible disruption to the server community.

Joe





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm