IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] TCP tuning

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Wed, 03 February 2010 22:26 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 B1C433A69A3 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:26:14 -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 EpqDByzXo3Ub for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nitro.isi.edu (nitro.isi.edu [128.9.208.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5BED3A695C for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:26:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [70.213.251.114] (114.sub-70-213-251.myvzw.com [70.213.251.114]) (authenticated bits=0) by nitro.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o13MQLXq014244 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:26:23 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B69F80D.6060603@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:26:21 -0800
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
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> <8FCC1879-FBA4-4A5F-8ADF-932A6731B7EA@ifi.uio.no> <4B69C35F.9080903@isi.edu> <0F35D991-4C33-45D9-B7C0-4DB6D70A510C@ifi.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <0F35D991-4C33-45D9-B7C0-4DB6D70A510C@ifi.uio.no>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigEC2206B5C6AD59209935F8D7"
X-MailScanner-ID: o13MQLXq014244
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>
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 22:26:14 -0000


Michael Welzl wrote:
...
>> Spencer Dawkins probably recalls better than I; I think there were
>> numerous BOFs centered around "link indications", including:
>>     TRIGTRAN BOF
>>     "LinkUp"
>>     draft-dawkins-linkup-nevermind
>>     LCI BOF (Link Characteristic Information for Mobility)
>>     MPTCP WG
>>     LEDBAT WG
>>     RFC-4709
> 
> Thanks! I was aware about some (I liked trigtran and was sad to
> see it fail) but definitely not all of these. At least LEDBAT doesn't
> seem to fit in the list btw

There are some people in LEDBAT who raised the issue that how much and
how you background might be related to the path properties. That's the
relationship.

Note that this is just what I could cull from my email archives in a
quick pass; there may be other examples of IETF and other work worth
checking, FWIW.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email