From: Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
To: dccp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/10] [RFC]: CCID 3 updates
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:19:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200611241619.04691@strip-the-willow> (raw)
I have cut this into 10 small pieces to make reviewing easier.
If everyone is happy with it, I can re-send it as one piece.
I have compile-tested all patches but I think CCID 3 needs some more
(other) work and then some performance-testing.
Patch 1: Avoid congestion control on zero-sized data packets.
Sending zero-sized Data/DataAck packets is theoretically possible,
but just makes trouble for CCID 3. This patch changes the error
code and removes one message which always gets printed.
Patch 2: Remove redundant statements in ccid3_hc_tx_packet_sent.
An analysis showed that one statement can be removed.
Patch 3: Resolves a small FIXME (Acks when nothing has been sent).
Patch 4: Consolidate timer resets.
This considers calculating the nofeedback timeout when no feedback
has previously been received. It applies common sense, since RFC 3448
is not clear about this case (it recommends to use max(4*R, 2*s/X), but
R is still undefined due to section 4.2)
Patch 5: Consistently update t_nom, t_ipi, t_delta.
This, like the other patches, results from the earlier analysis and
exploits the dependencies among variables.
Patch 6: Consolidate handling of t_RTO.
This updates several things related to t_RTO and nofeedback timeout,
exploiting yet another dependency.
And it adds a FIXME: currently the way it is calculated is non-standard.
The code does t_RTO = max(4*R, 1 second)
nofeedback_timeout = max(t_RTO, 2 * s/X)
(RFC 3448: nofeedback_timeout = max(4 * R, 2 * s/X) )
I have asked my colleague about it - is it good or bad to keep it this way???
Patch 7: Avoid `division by zero' errors.
This adds the protection against dividing a zero RTT for the sender.
I believe that this could be further improved - with regard to malfunctioning
timestamps.
Patch 8: Larger initial windows.
This implements the larger-initial-windows feature for CCID 3, as per [RFC 4342, 5.]
Patch 9: Add documentation for the TFRC structure fields (in include/linux/tfrc.h).
==> Here I have a suggestion.
The only, single source code file
which currently includes include/linux/tfrc.h
is net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc_equation.c
Maybe it would be a good
idea to merge include/linux/tfrc.h
with net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc.h
(also included by net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc_equation.c ),
since net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc.h
is currently almost empty ???
Patch 10: Simplify dccp_rcv_state_process.
This adds a minor simplification in the control flow.
-- Gerrit
next reply other threads:[~2006-11-24 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-24 16:19 Gerrit Renker [this message]
2006-11-25 4:03 ` [PATCH 0/10] [RFC]: CCID 3 updates Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2006-11-26 20:32 ` Ian McDonald
2006-11-27 10:35 ` Gerrit Renker
2006-11-27 11:51 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2006-11-27 12:46 ` Gerrit Renker
2006-11-27 13:35 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200611241619.04691@strip-the-willow \
--to=gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk \
--cc=dccp@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.