Re: [tcpm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc2581bis-06.txt

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Mon, 27 July 2009 12:56 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@ISI.EDU>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B257628C213 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 05:56:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QWH6YYXgM-Vs for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 05:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4D8F3A6802 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 05:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6RCu3U2008162; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 05:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 05:56:03 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Subject: Re: [tcpm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc2581bis-06.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:56:22 -0000

Hash: SHA1

Hi, all, wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group of the IETF.
> 	Title           : TCP Congestion Control
> 	Author(s)       : M. Allman, et al.
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc2581bis-06.txt
> 	Pages           : 17
> 	Date            : 2009-07-27
> This document defines TCP's four intertwined congestion control
>  algorithms: slow start, congestion avoidance, fast retransmit, and
>  fast recovery.  In addition, the document specifies how TCP should
>  begin transmission after a relatively long idle period, as well as
>  discussing various acknowledgment generation methods.  This document
>  obsoletes RFC 2581.

FWIW, regarding the discussion of the long idle period:

The algorithm used is based on a footnote in the appendix of an
unpublished extension of Van's 1988 Sigcomm paper. Amy Hughes, John
Heidemann, and I noted this a few years ago on this list in the
following I-D:

Here is a link to the 1988 Sigcomm paper:

The Sigcomm version was only 16 pages long. The word "idle" does not
appear anywhere in it.

FWIW, see also our I-D for a few ways to deal with the issue. The
problem is really that the sender is accumulating permission to burst,
which just using a timer cannot address.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -