On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, jamal wrote:
> > without real losses. The reason is the same: dropping cwnd under 2 segments
> > also breaks ACK clock due to delacks and therefore it is unacceptable.
>
> Aye, aye.
> I dont think you passed this feedback to the RFC which is going
> proposed standard next week ;-> But we dont wanna delay the publication,
> one could argue it is a implementation detail which Linux ignores.
Maybe it would be nice to standardize the Linux behavior, as
draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-03.txt (which is going to be discussed this week)
requires the retransmit timer stuff (it has a MUST).
I don't have problems with any of the solutions (RFC vs. Linux), but if
not standardized then the Linux TCP is going to be more agressive then RFC
says, and it would'n be nice if people started bashing Linux for that..
The even higher bias towards ECN-flows remains my problem in this case. :)
--
Bartok Istvan
|