[tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Suggestions"
Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Tue, 02 August 2016 19:15 UTC
Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5EC112D8ED for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 12:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cCjqvcPS-SWz for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 12:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x233.google.com (mail-io0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 546E012D8E8 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 12:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x233.google.com with SMTP id q83so222576554iod.1 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 12:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8g2ptD+s/ZaJEsJtprd93lNRk/+cycfCRnVMj/4RfJc=; b=j2gdpmaX/VApEvZFNtjP6wzZSvFdoVT8PU9rU0T9014wq8hR8fhCjuczCLZH1yRgCn mf5M+Amn70JX+9+iMRXzhfATMe7UyK6DZd5uxzNRExsiX6Il04l5wpp88itU0rE4gwLy hwMOqy9zg52xS2andWN87bjZJJD6KL4Ws26Zb6vKOip3LCQiwuX9mHgg9I+kAleBWtVY nTuhWQ4hfe+8cP2Uy058rOdFAUwfoaanSU6jf85Gjd80/xWXw9kc0X5vRsa+9mSDDpUM 8jlcNPZZPlblpvgSIXwuAo4NoEURG6xjeLtkLqyXxbmcex1bwBWcN9S0FSLy61B6NEAl 104Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8g2ptD+s/ZaJEsJtprd93lNRk/+cycfCRnVMj/4RfJc=; b=H1TDpMzcRqROgLHDg16ow19xtMY3plegR3KA74mtUVIn6u880eQz0UuIeiZ+GFKVx7 ptm0Sb5/u+zxLqiHOoTgzF8rVaUYSTpr1DkteLIUiMcTOWz0UpbBPrSB1HPBdxKhXM5R Wj9krI4mCR0U3odLSH5SzfTs3VPwmHP0LenofFn3E12tT/zLsl7ynkyPYxbmns9huU/6 rA0X5L26eqPxTkzQY3a38vWvlvOvv/y18CnhsVEC/f/NXaUPgT3jWzY1jt9cwBAqZJS2 b4POEzRn23k+pF/sMfqUhyvbXrhwIqbU14+tSC6B3t1eW+LYtj5MqgjY2R1OxQQUPEvy z3GQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouvb0h3IJq0vIrvXpBnEuSqtrrCloyFe9qzrpQUSNNKPbyRMyiZDpqL5C/FejVTOpg==
X-Received: by 10.107.132.217 with SMTP id o86mr63729853ioi.18.1470165326318; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 12:15:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.104] (cpe-76-188-215-129.neo.res.rr.com. [76.188.215.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w138sm1914926itc.8.2016.08.02.12.15.25 for <tcpm@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Aug 2016 12:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
To: tcpm@ietf.org
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <c40a6f5a-3b98-d74d-27fb-7dd6de59af00@mti-systems.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:15:25 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/dyZlF-zXkvlvibHbphC3yctQz5o>
Subject: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Suggestions"
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 19:15:28 -0000
In the latest revision of the 793bis draft, I added content from RFC
1122 on the SWS avoidance algorithms for sender-side and receiver-side.
These are laid out in 1122, but were not present in 793.
793 includes a section called "Window Management Suggestions", that I
believe was a precursor to the more-developed content in 1122 on:
(1) SWS avoidance sender-side algorithm
(2) SWS avoidance receiver-side algorithm
(3) Nagle algorithm
(4) delayed ACKs
(5) zero-window probing
With all of that 1122 content worked into 793bis, I did not think it
made sense to retain this section of the document, but it will be good
to confirm that with the WG.
For convenience, the content from 793 that I believe is no longer needed
is pasted below:
Window Management Suggestions
Allocating a very small window causes data to be transmitted in
many small segments when better performance is achieved using
fewer large segments.
One suggestion for avoiding small windows is for the receiver to
defer updating a window until the additional allocation is at
least X percent of the maximum allocation possible for the
connection (where X might be 20 to 40).
Another suggestion is for the sender to avoid sending small
segments by waiting until the window is large enough before
sending data. If the the user signals a push function then the
data must be sent even if it is a small segment.
Note that the acknowledgments should not be delayed or unnecessary
retransmissions will result. One strategy would be to send an
acknowledgment when a small segment arrives (with out updating the
window information), and then to send another acknowledgment with
new window information when the window is larger.
The segment sent to probe a zero window may also begin a break up
of transmitted data into smaller and smaller segments. If a
segment containing a single data octet sent to probe a zero window
is accepted, it consumes one octet of the window now available.
If the sending TCP simply sends as much as it can whenever the
window is non zero, the transmitted data will be broken into
alternating big and small segments. As time goes on, occasional
pauses in the receiver making window allocation available will
result in breaking the big segments into a small and not quite so
big pair. And after a while the data transmission will be in
mostly small segments.
The suggestion here is that the TCP implementations need to
actively attempt to combine small window allocations into larger
windows, since the mechanisms for managing the window tend to lead
to many small windows in the simplest minded implementations.
Any thoughts or feedback on removing this from 793bis will be
appreciated, thanks!
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Yuchung Cheng
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Yuchung Cheng
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Theodore V Faber
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… John Heffner
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… David Borman
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Christian Huitema
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Yuchung Cheng
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… David Borman
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Su… Yuchung Cheng
- [tcpm] 793bis: removing "Window Management Sugges… Wesley Eddy