Subject: [Tsvwg] draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-01

From: Sally Floyd <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 14:08:08 -0700

At the last IETF, I sent the following email to the mailing
list:

>From the tsvwg meeting at the IETF, now in progress, here are
>the issues to track (in the next week) for WG Last Call,
>for the NewReno TCP:
>
>* Add a note to the section on "Implementation issues for the data 
>sender" saying that the sender might want a separate flag to record
>whether it is in the Fast Recovery procedure, for robustness
>with window updates and out-of-order acks.
>
>* Add an implementation note about taking care of sequence wrap.
>
>* Address the issue raised by Andrei Gurtov about whether
>packets are sent in response to dup acks in those cases
>when Fast Recovery is not invoked (because of bugfix).

We have made changes addressing these issues, and submitted a
revised version of the internet-draft, which is now ready for
Working Group Last Call:
 
http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-01.txt
http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-01.ps

We have made no changes to the basic algorithm specified in 
Section 3 of the draft.

Addressing the third item in the list involved adding a discussion
in Section 6 about possible heuristics that a sender may use for
distinguishing between three dup ACKS from a retransmitted packet
that was dropped, and three dup ACKs simply from the unnecessary
retransmission of three packets.
 
- Sally 
http://www.icir.org/floyd/

To see the diffs, one could use wdiff to compare:

http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-00.txt
http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-01.txt

or compare:

http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-00.nroff
http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-01.nroff

_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg

---

From: Mark Allman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 15:12:17 -0400

> http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-tsvwg-newreno-01.ps

I read through the document and sent the authors a few minor
comments.  Nothing major.  My opinion is that the document is ready
to go.

allman

--
Mark Allman -- ICIR -- http://www.icir.org/mallman/