On 13 February 2013 02:27, Andre Oppermann <an...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Again I'd like to point out that this sort of modification should > be implemented as a congestion control module. All the hook points > are already there and can readily be used instead of adding more special > cases to the generic part of TCP. The CC algorithm can be selected per > socket. For such a special CC module it'd get a nice fat warning that > it is not suitable for Internet use. > > Additionally I speculate that for the use-case of John he may also be > willing to forgo congestion avoidance and always operate in (ill-named) > "slow start" mode. With a special CC module this can easily be tweaked. There are some cute things that could be done here - eg, having an L3 route table entry map to a congestion control (like having an MSS in the L3 entry too.) But I'd love to see some modelling / data showing competing congestion control algorithms on the same set of congested pipes. Doubly so on multiple congested pipes (ie, modelling a handful of parallel user<->last-mile<->IX<->various transit feeds with different levels of congestion/RTT<->IX<->last mile<->user connections.) You all know much more about this than I do. :-) Thanks, Adrian _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
