IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] TCP tuning

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Wed, 03 February 2010 17:54 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@ISI.EDU>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C0B3A693E for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 09:54:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Irujo4pJ7KOW for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 09:54:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nitro.isi.edu (nitro.isi.edu [128.9.208.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09C153A6A7F for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 09:54:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [70.213.181.125] (125.sub-70-213-181.myvzw.com [70.213.181.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by nitro.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o13HqG4x000121 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 3 Feb 2010 09:52:23 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B69B7CE.1060802@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:52:14 -0800
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org>
References: <7BE9742D-6EDC-43FE-84FC-D22C52D23152@nokia.com> <4B69A53E.2050508@isi.edu> <4B69ACD9.1030105@sun.com> <4B69AE64.8070608@isi.edu> <10EDB15A-0DF6-45EE-897C-E38AA611134C@ifi.uio.no> <4B69B030.3000508@isi.edu> <D70C30EF-91E3-4DB6-B0C7-0A6328C77E6A@ifi.uio.no> <4B69B5AC.1090209@isi.edu> <396556a21002030948s39005503ie8bc96a52b5acb3c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <396556a21002030948s39005503ie8bc96a52b5acb3c@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigDDD41DA322E48EB4072FFFA4"
X-MailScanner-ID: o13HqG4x000121
X-ISI-4-69-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, Kacheong Poon <kacheong.poon@sun.com>, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP tuning
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:54:24 -0000


Adam Langley wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
>> IMO, I would encourage Google to take their work there and get feedback
>> there first. TCPM is a place where mature, vetted ideas should be
>> considered, preferably (IMO).
> 
> I think an important part of the presentation is that this is already
> a very well vetted idea: by using multiple subdomains and concurrent
> connections, HTTP has already increased the initcwnd drastically.

By vetted, I would include the experiments and the detailed information
available. That vetting should be checked in the IRTF first; that's a
better place to review technical material for consideration of past and
related work, and verification of methodology.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email