On Thu, 25 May 2006 13:23:50 -0700 (PDT) David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "#ZHOU BIN#" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 16:30:48 +0800 > > > Yes, I agree. Actually the main contribution of TCP Veno is not in > > this AI phase. No matter the ABC is added or not, TCP Veno can > > always improve the performance over wireless networks, according to > > our tests. > > It seems to me that the wireless issue is seperate from congestion > control. > > The key is to identify "true loss" due to overflow of intermediate > router queues, vs. "false loss" which is due to temporary radio > signal interference. Is it really possible to tell the two apart. Also, a lot of times when an access point is overloaded, performance is killed because of congestion overload. > This determination is a job for the loss detection in the generic ACK > processing code in tcp_input.c, not for a congestion control algorithm. > The congestion control algorithm uses the "true loss" information to > make congestion control decisions. > > We already have code that tries to make this differentiation, in the > form of FRTO, and your techniques can likely be placed there as well. The general idea of resetting cwnd to an estimate of capacity seems to be a general feature of Westwood, Veno, Compound and Africa. Also FreeBSD does the same thing, but they don't have a cool name. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
