On 05/03/2013 11:55, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote: > I've no idea about the example quoted, but I can see some of their motivation. > > TCP's assumptions (really simplified) that loss of packet = congestion => > backoff > aren't necessarily so in a wireless network, where packets can be lost without > congestion. This means that TCP into, out of, or across, a MANET using TCP > can be > bad. It then tends to happen that the MANET people don't fully understand TCP, > and the TCP people don't fully understand MANETs.
The effects you mention were definitely discussed in PILC. http://www.ietf.org/wg/concluded/pilc.html Maybe the PILC documents need revision? Brian > > I don't have a single good reference for what I say above, in particular have > things got better (or worse) as TCP evolves, and therefore which references > are still valid? But the obvious Google search (TCP MANET) throws up various > discussions. >
