On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Rick Jones <rick.jon...@hpe.com> wrote: > > On 03/14/2016 02:15 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 19:06 +0100, Bendik Rønning Opstad wrote: >>> >>> Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) is a mechanism for TCP aimed at reducing >>> the latency for applications sending time-dependent data. >>> >>> Latency-sensitive applications or services, such as online games, >>> remote control systems, and VoIP, produce traffic with thin-stream >>> characteristics, characterized by small packets and relatively high >>> inter-transmission times (ITT). When experiencing packet loss, such >>> latency-sensitive applications are heavily penalized by the need to >>> retransmit lost packets, which increases the latency by a minimum of >>> one RTT for the lost packet. Packets coming after a lost packet are >>> held back due to head-of-line blocking, causing increased delays for >>> all data segments until the lost packet has been retransmitted. >> >> >> Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com> >> >> Note that RDB probably should get some SNMP counters, >> so that we get an idea of how many times a loss could be repaired. > > > And some idea of the duplication seen by receivers, assuming there isn't > already a counter for such a thing in Linux.
We sort of track that in the awkwardly named LINUX_MIB_DELAYEDACKLOST > > happy benchmarking, > > rick jones > > >> >> Ideally, if the path happens to be lossless, all these pro active >> bundles are overhead. Might be useful to make RDB conditional to >> tp->total_retrans or something. >> >> >
