Re: [tcpm] [Tmrg] Increasing the Initial Window - Notes

Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> Fri, 19 November 2010 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <mallman@icir.org>
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 A18733A690B for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:30:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.533
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 u57d3Fd2ubnf for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:30:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU [192.150.186.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2073B28C128 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:30:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lawyers.icir.org (jack.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU [192.150.186.73]) by fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (8.12.11.20060614/8.12.11) with ESMTP id oAJJUxBv020188; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:30:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lawyers.icir.org (www.obdev.at [127.0.0.1]) by lawyers.icir.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1BF2568C62; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:30:59 -0500 (EST)
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
In-Reply-To: <4CE6C30E.7040307@isi.edu>
Organization: International Computer Science Institute (ICSI)
Song-of-the-Day: TV Dinner
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="--------ma53360-1"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:30:59 -0500
Sender: mallman@icir.org
Message-Id: <20101119193059.6C1BF2568C62@lawyers.icir.org>
Cc: David Borman <david.borman@windriver.com>, tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>, "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [Tmrg] Increasing the Initial Window - Notes
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mallman@icir.org
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: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:30:20 -0000

Joe,

I think we can basically agree on the high order bit of a backstop.
But, ...

> - either there's an objective metric for 'no harm' or not
> 
> 	if there is and there's harm, backoff (moderately slowly,
> 	i.e., over weeks, not minutes)

I can't reconcile this with your example of 1000 connections opened in a
row and if one bumps its head then the rest will and OH MY!  Seemingly
now you're willing to let things bump their head for weeks?  I (a) can't
follow this seemingly moving target you present and (b) think if you're
willing to let 'problems' persist for weeks then it seems you can't
really be all that worried about IW10.

allman