Re: [TERNLI] Notes from tonight's ad hoc

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

Aaron Falk wrote:
> 
> On Jul 28, 2006, at 5:56 AM, Mark Allman wrote:
> 
>>   + Giving a generic signal that *something* has changed and it likely
>>     matters and so the transport should re-init itself (e.g., forget the
>>     SRTT, RTTVAR, cwnd, ssthresh, MTU value, etc.).
> 
> Perhaps the signal should be that congestion state or RTT estimate is no
> longer valid.  I.e., make the signal have transport semantics.

That is what I was afraid of - that means that the link knows what the
network is doing, e.g., whether it is using the link for CBR or bursty
traffic, etc.

Joe