> On Monday, August 25, 2014 9:34 AM, Michael Welzl <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> On 25. aug. 2014, at 10:19, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>
>> What about framing the retransmissions not in number but rather in
> time? For example the maximum of either time to transmit a few (say 3?)
> packet
> at the current data rate (or maybe one rate lower than current to allow
> setoriating signal quality) or 20ms (pulled out of thin air, would need some
> research). The first should make sure we actually retransmit to overcome
> glitches, and the second should make sure that RTT does not increase to
> dramatically. This basically assumes that for reasonable interactive traffic
> we
> only have a given RTT budget and should make sure not to overspend ;)
>
> That would be VERY good I think!!!!
I agree.
A third reason for link-layer retransmission is to prevent glitches in
video/audio
streams which aren't run over TCP and won't retransmit themselves. (This was
basically
the reason link-layer retransmission got added to DSL, because telco's were
keen that
their bundled TV didn't have glitches - in this case, due to noise, rather than
collisions).
This is also very consistent with the idea of only retransmitting within a
short period.
Alex
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
