Re: [tcpm] Request for input regarding the initial window increase

Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de> Wed, 20 July 2011 14:10 UTC

Return-Path: <mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de>
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 4504421F89BA for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.777
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.777 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.942, BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o2BEAAnPjOWQ for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsrv.ikr.uni-stuttgart.de (mailsrv.ikr.uni-stuttgart.de [129.69.170.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A93D921F88DD for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from netsrv1.ikr.uni-stuttgart.de (netsrv1-c [10.11.12.12]) by mailsrv.ikr.uni-stuttgart.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0694C633B2; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:10:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vpn-2-cl177 (vpn-2-cl177 [10.41.21.177]) by netsrv1.ikr.uni-stuttgart.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBAC159A8A; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:10:00 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de>
Organization: University of Stuttgart (Germany), IKR
To: tcpm@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:10:00 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 (enterprise35 0.20101217.1207316)
References: <133D9897FB9C5E4E9DF2779DC91E947C0654B57A@SLFSNX.rcs.alcatel-research.de>
In-Reply-To: <133D9897FB9C5E4E9DF2779DC91E947C0654B57A@SLFSNX.rcs.alcatel-research.de>
X-KMail-QuotePrefix: >
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <201107201610.00237.mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Request for input regarding the initial window increase
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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, 20 Jul 2011 14:10:16 -0000

Hi again,

to sum up, here my option to the questions below

> Question 1: Moving forward a fixed increase of the permitted TCP initial
> congestion window (draft-ietf-tcpm-initcwnd-01)?
>
> Answer 1A: Fixed upper limit to proposed standard
> Answer 2B: Fixed upper limit to experimental
> Answer 3C: Something else (e. g., some adaptive scheme, or no change at
> all compared to RFC 3390); this would imply a substantial change of
> draft-ietf-tcpm-initcwnd-01

2B

> Question 2: Maximum permitted initial congestion window?
>
> Answer 2A: 10 MSS for an MTU of 1500 byte as suggested by
> draft-ietf-tcpm-initcwnd-01 (other MTUs are still TBD)
> Answer 2B: Another value (please suggest and justify)

2B, all least there should be done some investigation on other values than 10 
before we go for 10


> Question 3: Adaptive solution as an alternative?
>
> Answer 3A: Adoption of draft-touch-tcpm-automatic-iw-01 as WG item
> heading towards experimental
> Answer 3B: No adoption

I guess 3B, mostly the senders which send a lot of data are servers of a 
company. Those servers can be changed more or less easily...

But I don't think there should be a fixed value for all flow which is not 
changeable. I guess there should be a socket option or something like this. 
Such that the application could change the IW for certain transmissions.

Mirja