IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00

<L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk> Thu, 10 June 2010 09:39 UTC

Return-Path: <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
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 28BBB3A6930 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 02:39:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.834
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.834 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.094, BAYES_20=-0.74, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 oLuJwzC9SkaS for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 02:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail82.messagelabs.com (mail82.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04D9A3A63CA for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 02:39:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-82.messagelabs.com!1276162796!640212!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.43]
Received: (qmail 27361 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2010 09:39:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.43) by server-9.tower-82.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 10 Jun 2010 09:39:56 -0000
Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.1.69]) by EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.43]) with mapi; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:39:56 +0100
From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
To: hagen@jauu.net
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:39:54 +0100
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00
Thread-Index: AcsIEv4GZuotJVlZSyGzdbxpOR8VkwAbdRTA
Message-ID: <FD7B10366AE3794AB1EC5DE97A93A37305A30B0905@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk>
References: <20100609151532.8E75E28C0D0@core3.amsl.com> <33D3BDE9-7E8D-4DF0-B8D5-BFFC66CF9C99@nokia.com> <20100609173556.GA5338@nuttenaction> <07BF7B99-FF83-44E1-BF52-BED91ACA7F3A@surrey.ac.uk> <20100609200052.GB5338@nuttenaction> <D5BD1095-C3E3-48F4-BFAD-3A0DB39E971B@surrey.ac.uk> <20100609203315.GC5338@nuttenaction>
In-Reply-To: <20100609203315.GC5338@nuttenaction>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00
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: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:39:57 -0000

 
See section IIc of our protocol radius paper.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer [mailto:hagen@jauu.net] 
Sent: 09 June 2010 21:33
To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng)
Cc: lars.eggert@nokia.com; tcpm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00
Importance: High

* L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk | 2010-06-09 21:13:34 [+0100]:

>I've read such papers. They tend not to discuss the initial SYN/ACK 
>handshake and the timer related to that (probably because their 
>simulation tools default to not simulating SYN/ACK), or consider the 
>implications of TCP slow start with long propagation delays.

It is a little bit off-topic, but can you comment on the actual problems of the initial SYN/ACK handshake and the timer interplay? Linux for example use the same RTO timer for the initial handshake and the ongoing connection. If you tune the RTO timer you will also tune it for the initial three way handshake (this statement is not 100% sure, I hide some petite differences, but the effect is insignificant). Why differs the handshake so much in your eyes? And yes, don't trust any simulation models that you have fully developed by your own. ;-)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email