<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt">Yes, that is exactly what I mean (quote):<br>"it would be sensible to allow a CA designer to specify a milder form of<br>back-off when ECN is received? If so, I entirely agree."<br><br>Dirceu<br><br><br><div><br></div><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><br><div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px"><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Lachlan Andrew <lachlan.andrew@gmail.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Dirceu Cavendish <dirceu_cavendish@yahoo.com>; iccrg list <iccrg@cs.ucl.ac.uk><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Fri, July 15, 2011 7:49:22 PM<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [Iccrg] Incentives for ECN<br></font><br>
Greetings Dirceu,<br><br>On 16 July 2011 04:13, Dirceu Cavendish <<a ymailto="mailto:dirceu_cavendish@yahoo.com" href="mailto:dirceu_cavendish@yahoo.com">dirceu_cavendish@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>> I know of base stations that drop IP packets in advance as a way to quench<br>> Internet side incoming (download) traffic<br>> This type of use case could be an incentive for operators to use ECN,<br>> without throwing away application data.<br><br>Yes, that is the incentive mentioned in the draft. However, unless<br>loss rates are unacceptably high (>>1%, which causes CWND < 10<br>packets), then the amount of application data that gets lost is not<br>enough of an incentive. (If it were, then ECN would already be widely<br>deployed.)<br><br>> And BTW, imho, ECNs being treated as loss at end-points may present a<br>> dis-incentive for end-points to react to ECNs at all, since the CA designer<br>> may find cwnd
exponential decrease too drastic a measure to be taken when<br>> receiving ECNs.<br><br>I'm not sure that I understand this. If ECNs are treated as loss at<br>end-points, then they are reacted to. Do you mean that you think it<br>would be sensible to allow a CA designer to specify a milder form of<br>back-off when ECN is received? If so, I entirely agree.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Lachlan<br><br>-- <br>Lachlan Andrew Centre for Advanced Internet Architectures (CAIA)<br>Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia<br><span><<a target="_blank" href="http://caia.swin.edu.au/cv/landrew">http://caia.swin.edu.au/cv/landrew</a>></span><br>Ph +61 3 9214 4837<br></div></div>
</div></body></html>