Re: [tcpm] Congestion control in face of ICMP unreachable messages

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Fri, 17 August 2007 16:41 UTC

Return-path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM4t4-0008SI-V6; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:41:26 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM4t3-0008SB-BU for tcpm@ietf.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:41:25 -0400
Received: from vapor.isi.edu ([128.9.64.64]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM4t2-00066g-S3 for tcpm@ietf.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:41:25 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.42] (pool-71-105-86-112.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.105.86.112]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HGfGmV026800; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <46C5CFA1.3090603@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:41:05 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Schaffrath <daniel.schaffrath@mac.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Congestion control in face of ICMP unreachable messages
References: <8B61F72F-2F75-4388-976F-9748F8784AB3@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <8B61F72F-2F75-4388-976F-9748F8784AB3@mac.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.3
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2108501203=="
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

Daniel,

AFAIK, congestion control response to in-band messages (ACKs) and
timeouts (implied loss, as TCP interprets it), as well as to some new
fields (ECN, etc.) which are carried in the same packets.

Reactions to external congestion signals - ICMP source quench (which has
been informally deprecated a while ago, but has not been documented as
such yet) or otherwise - would constitute another opportunity for a DOS
attack, and seem like a bad idea to encourage.

Joe

Daniel Schaffrath wrote:
> Dear Community,
> 
> I was wondering if there are any recommendations regarding congestion
> control in face of ICMP (host/network) unreachable messages. If I am not
> mistaken there is nothing in the various TCPM documents... nor in any RFC.
> 
> Maybe you have any pointers?
> 
> Thank you,
> Daniel Schaffrath
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

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