[tcpm] New version of F-RTO draft

Hi all,

We submitted a revision of F-RTO draft ("F-RTO: An Algorithm for
Detecting Spurious Retransmission Timeouts with TCP and SCTP",
draft-ietf-tsvwg-tcp-frto-01.txt) under the tsvwg last week. The
draft will be moved under the tcpm wg, and we will resubmit it
with a new name once the draft submission is opened again after Seoul
IETF. We think the draft is ready for WG last call, so please read the
draft and let us know of any comments you may have. The best
place for further discussion on this draft will be under the tcpm
mailing list.

There haven't been much changes on the draft recently. Between
draft-ietf-tsvwg-tcp-frto-00.txt (Oct '03) and
draft-ietf-tsvwg-tcp-frto-01.txt (Feb '04)
the main changes were:

- A number of editorial changes to make the draft more readable

- Rewrote parts of section 4: "Taking Actions after Detecting Spurious
RTO". It earlier listed three examples for responding to spurious
retransmission timeout. Those were removed, because they weren't up to
date with the current versions of refered response algorithms, and we
did not want to keep updating the section in case there are any future
changes on the algorithms. Therefore we now briefly list the known
response algorithms and give references to the I-Ds and papers that
discuss responding to spurious timeout.

And to give some additional context for reviewing the draft, the main
changes in the previous update from
draft-sarolahti-tsvwg-tcp-frto-04.txt (Jun '03) to
draft-ietf-tsvwg-tcp-frto-00.txt were:

- Made the algorithm description more compact by moving much of the
explaining text out of the algorithm definition.

- Added section 5. "SCTP Considerations" that discusses applying the
F-RTO algorithm with SCTP protocol.

- Added a requirement for SACK-based F-RTO algorithm that it would not
be applied when earlier loss recovery is underway. This made it
possible to simplify the algorithm, especially since the usefulness of
detecting spurious RTO under existing loss recovery can be
argued. However, we added Appendix B that discusses this topic.

- Did some editing on examples with different scenarios in Appendix
A to make it more understandable and readable.

Thanks to all who gave us feedback on the topics above!

- Pasi & Markku

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm