Re: [tcpm] Is this a problem?

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

Lloyd Wood wrote:
> At Tuesday 20/11/2007 17:57 -0800, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
>> Chandrashekhar Appanna wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 04:01:21PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote:
>> ...
>>>>> The community standardised TCP window size advertisements. That's a local resource control issue, surely?
>>>> That's something you have to tell the other end, i.e., it requires a
>>>> change to the protocol on the wire. This one can be implemented without
>>>> any change to the protocol at all - entirely at the app layer.
>>>   And I think the authors are positioning that there is a better place in
>>>   the architecture to solve this and that is in tcp. I think it is boiling
>>>   down to just a matter of opinions so far.. esp when you keep repeating
>>>   that it could be solved in the app layer (for as long as I recall!!)
>> First, the argument above is that this is like standardizing TCP window
>> advertisements.
>>
>> Second, the original argument was that this wasn't solvable at the app
>> layer.
>>
>> The rationale changes and the arguments persists. That's useful to note, IMO
> 
> Joe,
> 
> you appear to be confusing me with an author of the draft in question

Lloyd,

I was not. I was explaining my response above.

> - and confusing my question about window advertisements (which indicate
> to the other end how it can usefully make use of what is essentially a
> local resource) for some change in rationale on behalf of the draft authors.

I was explaining that the authors have changed their rationale;
originally, it was needed in TCP because that was the only way to solve
the problem. I was not asserting that you were creating a new rationale
or changing one.

As to window advertisements, as I noted above, that is a property that
one end communicates to the other. It isn't of purely local impact.

Joe

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm