Re: [tcpm] RFC 5827 on Early Retransmit for and Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)

Mark Allman <> Tue, 27 April 2010 04:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5184328C0FE for <>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.197
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.402, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xBQT08ULdQ-4 for <>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99F03A6883 for <>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (jack.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU []) by fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU ( with ESMTP id o3R4I89p023851; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F51F24164; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 00:18:08 -0400 (EDT)
To: Fred Baker <>
From: Mark Allman <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Organization: International Computer Science Institute (ICSI)
Song-of-the-Day: Friend Of The Devil
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="--------ma25984-1"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 00:18:08 -0400
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] RFC 5827 on Early Retransmit for and Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 04:18:36 -0000

> I'm sure you're wiser than I. 


> I'm just thinking that in a context where cwnd<4 (pretty normal at my
> house when uploading to Picasa, which is an obvious file-transfer
> test, because the RTT is relatively short) sending after two dup-acks
> inserts a relatively large delay on the line in the event that it is a
> wrong guess.

Why?  I don't follow.

> If you're going to increase the chance of guessing wrong, it seems
> like you might want to minimize the side-effect of being wrong.

The side effect seems to me to be you inject an additional packet into
the network and cut the cwnd by a packet or two---which is readily
recouped (esp. if the RTT is short).  What else is there?