Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarification for asymmetric links (return congestion, as well as limit to throughput) #3885

Closed
gorryfair opened this issue Jul 9, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3896
Closed
Assignees
Labels
-transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.

Comments

@gorryfair
Copy link
Contributor

I promised to raise an issue relating to this text:
"It can also improve connection throughput on severely asymmetric links; see Section 3 of [RFC3449]."

This partly addresss the case, but it does not yet note the implications of the return path traffic on congestion of the return path. I think this is a useful addition, because it helps alert the reader of the tradeoff ... which can be quite important for half-duplex/shared radio, etc where the spectrum consumed sending an ACK can even outweigh the cost of sending a data packet (because they use different design of PHY).

I suggest:
"It can improve connection throughput using severely asymmetric links and can also reduce the volume of acknowledgment traffic using return path capacity; see Section 3 of [RFC3449]."

@LPardue LPardue added this to Triage in Late Stage Processing Jul 9, 2020
ianswett added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 13, 2020
@ianswett ianswett self-assigned this Jul 13, 2020
@ianswett ianswett added -transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. labels Jul 13, 2020
@project-bot project-bot bot moved this from Triage to Editorial Issues in Late Stage Processing Jul 13, 2020
Late Stage Processing automation moved this from Editorial Issues to Issue Handled Jul 14, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
-transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.
Projects
Late Stage Processing
  
Issue Handled
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants