> 1. Receiver should tell sender to re-send as soon as possible. > (But TCP makes receiver purely passive)
This isn't really going to help you at all. With SACK (especially, but even without it) the receiver isn't really in a whole lot better position than the sender to judge when a packet is actually lost. Some people have worked on SNACKs (selective NEGATIVE acknowledgments), but my opinion is that the results (that I have seen) show them to be fairly equivalent to SACK in terms of performance. > 2. Receiver should tell sender what is really necessary to re-send. > (Sometimes only a single ACK number of TCP cannot include enough > information) RFC2018. (Which provides more than a single ACK number. But, this doesn't make the receiver tell the sender what to resend. The logic still resides at the sender.) allman
pgpleNdtDKUgO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
