From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Natale Patriciello <natale.patriciello@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Ahmed Said <ahmed.said@uniroma2.it>,
Francesco Zampognaro <zampognaro@ing.uniroma2.it>,
Cesare Roseti <roseti@ing.uniroma2.it>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] wave: Added TCP Wave
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 10:43:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1508089409.31614.74.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171014114714.3694-6-natale.patriciello@gmail.com>
On Sat, 2017-10-14 at 13:47 +0200, Natale Patriciello wrote:
> TCP Wave (TCPW) replaces the window-based transmission paradigm of the
> standard TCP with a burst-based transmission, the ACK-clock scheduling
> with a self-managed timer and the RTT-based congestion control loop
> with an Ack-based Capacity and Congestion Estimation (ACCE) module. In
> non-technical words, it sends data down the stack when its internal
> timer expires, and the timing of the received ACKs contribute to
> updating this timer regularly.
>
> It is the first TCP congestion control that uses the timing constraint
> developed in the Linux kernel.
You seem to have missed BBR.
This is against what we have worked in the last years, preventing bursts
in the first place.
If this series is to address WIFI peculiarities with TSQ (this is a well
known problem, still waiting for a fix), I would rather not add all this
code in TCP and find better alternatives.
Since you do not provide information and testing results, there is no
chance we accept such patches.
Your work seems to be a variation of TSQ, and a very complex one.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-15 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-14 11:47 [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] TCP Wave Natale Patriciello
2017-10-14 11:47 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] tcp: Added a function to retrieve pacing timer Natale Patriciello
2017-10-14 11:47 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] tcp: implemented pacing_expired Natale Patriciello
2017-10-15 17:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-10-14 11:47 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] tcp: added get_segs_per_round Natale Patriciello
2017-10-15 17:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-10-14 11:47 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/5] tcp: added segment sent Natale Patriciello
2017-10-14 11:47 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] wave: Added TCP Wave Natale Patriciello
2017-10-15 17:43 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
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=1508089409.31614.74.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=ahmed.said@uniroma2.it \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=natale.patriciello@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roseti@ing.uniroma2.it \
--cc=zampognaro@ing.uniroma2.it \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox