[Iccrg] Fwd: agenda planning for ICCRG in Anaheim

[Lachlan Andrew]

Greetings Michael

On 22 February 2010 09:07, Michael Welzl <michawe at ifi.uio.no> wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2010, at 10:48 PM, Matt Mathis wrote:
>>
>> Therefor: all stacks should include a secondary congestion control
>> mechanism that detects the delay caused by large queues in the network
>> and regulates their congestion window accordingly.
>
>> It may be an appropriate future work item of the ICCRG and IETF to
>> attempt to standardize such a mechanism.   In the short term it would
>> be sufficient to merely agree on a statement of principle or intent.
>
> - attempting to standardize: isn't that exactly what LEDBAT is doing?

I thought LEDBAT was specifically for less-than-best-effort.  Matt's
proposal is that *all* stacks should consider delay.  That is, we also
want a replacement which is competitive with standard TCP "on
average", although perhaps less aggressive when buffers are large and
more aggressive either in the presence of non-congestion loss or when
recovering from transient congestion.

CTCP fits the final part of that (recovering faster from transient
congestion), but misses the other components.

Also, since LEDBAT is IETF not IRTF, it is not doing research.  It
will standardise something, but probably not the best thing.  The
ICCRG can take a longer term view, and hopefully get it right before
putting a proposal to the IETF.

Cheers,
Lachlan

-- 
Lachlan Andrew  Centre for Advanced Internet Architectures (CAIA)
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia
<http://caia.swin.edu.au/cv/landrew> <http://netlab.caltech.edu/lachlan>
Ph +61 3 9214 4837