I came across this mail - which may be useful for this discussion:
http://www.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/2004-November/004402.html Regds Arjuna On 1/1/07, Arjuna Sathiaseelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *For links with large RTTs, then having a min RTO may give better > tolerance levels for bursty applications and the application designers > would luv it! :).. > I dont understand how we could have a min RTO of 100 ms for links with > large delays..is this for default or for all cases?? Ok - I think I get the point now of having a 100 ms min RTO..but something else popped up into my mind...wouldnt this cause unfairness? Say a very large flow traversing a link say A with very low RTT (say 1ms )will not reduce the rate if a nofeedback is not received for almost 100 RTTs, whereas a small flow traversing a higher RTT link which includes link A in its path (>= 25ms) would have to reduce the rate after 4 RTTs..Is this OK? Regds Arjuna -- Electronics Research Group University of Aberdeen Aberdeen AB24 3UE Web: www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/arjuna Phone : +44-1224-272780 Fax : +44-1224-272497
-- Electronics Research Group University of Aberdeen Aberdeen AB24 3UE Web: www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/arjuna Phone : +44-1224-272780 Fax : +44-1224-272497
