From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerrit Renker Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:40:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5]: Revert use of MSS instead of s Message-Id: <200708021540.02720@strip-the-willow> List-Id: References: <200707261356.53153@strip-the-willow> In-Reply-To: <200707261356.53153@strip-the-willow> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: dccp@vger.kernel.org Quoting Ian McDonald: | > Can understand that - that is partly why I suggested to wait a little,= and see if and the | > two drafts stabilise. If there were updates to 4342 then I would also = be all for tracking | > them. However, 4342 is written in such a clever way that updates of 34= 48 do not apply. | > I am in support of the 3448 draft changes that are in the kernel so fa= r, since to my | > understanding they improve the performance over an `orthodox' 4342; th= e point being that | > no one cares how orthodox the implementation is when the performance i= s awful. | > | Unfortunately I can't really wait too long as it is for my thesis. | That's OK as I can reference which draft I use. It has been suggested | for CCID3.bis (and agreed) that CCID3 should track TFRC. I have enquired about the status of rfc3448bis - the situation at the momen= t seems that there are a lot of changes in rfc3448bis which have not gone through community re= view yet; there are further edits/changes which need to be addressed (probably in the next revi= sion for the December IETF meeting); and only after this has been done can some stabilisation be = expected. Until then there are probably going to be many changes. It seems that Faster Rest= art is being rewritten into a new algorithm, using something like TCP cwnd validation. For me this all looks very experimental, but it can be useful to experiment= . Therefore, if you wanted to, the offer is there to put all this stuff as a fork of the test t= ree. =20 | > | =A0If you do have a list of them it would be great. I see quite a few | > | =A0comments about bis in the code. | > I don't have a list at present, need to go through the works. Will pos= t at a later point. | > | Don't worry too much about this, as this is my research so don't want | to waste your time :-) Thanks - much appreciated, this can take a little time.