[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106201336450.17529@wel-95.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:42:45 +0300 (EEST)
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To: Dominik Kaspar <dokaspar.ietf@...il.com>
cc: Alexander Zimmermann <alexander.zimmermann@...sys.rwth-aachen.de>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
Carsten Wolff <carsten@...ffcarsten.de>,
John Heffner <johnwheffner@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Lennart Schulte <Lennart.Schulte@...sys.rwth-aachen.de>,
Arnd Hannemann <arnd@...dnet.de>
Subject: Re: Linux TCP's Robustness to Multipath Packet Reordering
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011, Dominik Kaspar wrote:
> Ah... the receiver DSACKs the "original" packet. However, the sender
> already received an ACK for its retransmission and advances SND.UNA.
> When the DSACK finally arrives, it is actually outside of the SND.UNA
> - SND.NXT range, which causes the DSACK to trigger "SACK reneging".
> Did I get that right? :-)
Where did you get this idea of reneging?!? Reneging has nothing to do with
DSACKs, instead it is only detected if the cumulative ACK stops to such
boundary where the _next_ segment is SACKed (i.e., some reason the
receiver "didn't bother" to cumulatively ACK for that too). ...That
certainly does not happen (ever) for out of window DSACKs.
--
i.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists