Re: [tcpm] TCP tuning

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

rick jones wrote:
> 
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Jerry Chu wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:17 AM, SCHARF, Michael
>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>> This topic seems to be gaining momentum, and the WG should
>>>>> take some time considering if there is work here for it.
>>>> IMHO there could indeed be room for increasing the initial window. If
>>>> most data transfers continue to be smaller than 3 MSS, a larger initial
>>>> window would not necessarily cause harm, as it is seldomly used. Still,
>>>> this would speed up those data transfers that currently suffer from
>>>> Slow-Start.
>>>
>>> Actually our data points to the contrary - the average web object and
>>> page
>>> size have been rising steadily. E.g., the majority of our search
>>> responses
>>> no longer fit in 3 MSS these days.
>>
>> This should be relevant only for the first response from a given IP
>> address; persistent connections should render this moot for subsequent
>> requests.
> 
> Modulo slow-start after idle. 

I've already cited the work that explains that this doesn't actually
happen on web exchanges exactly because the client request is small
(doesn't matter that its side was idle), and the client request causes
the server to think it wasn't idle either. That's in the ToN paper I cited.

Yes, if/when that's fixed, it'll be an issue. Not right now, though.

Joe