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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Tradeoffs in the persistent congestion threshold #4215

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Oct 15, 2020
Merged

Tradeoffs in the persistent congestion threshold #4215

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
fd1456a
Tradeoffs of persistent congestion threshold
janaiyengar Oct 14, 2020
6c64baa
Update draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md
janaiyengar Oct 15, 2020
e6c489b
format
janaiyengar Oct 15, 2020
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
11 changes: 9 additions & 2 deletions draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -951,8 +951,15 @@ This duration allows a sender to send as many packets before establishing
persistent congestion, including some in response to PTO expiration, as TCP does
with Tail Loss Probes ({{RACK}}) and a Retransmission Timeout ({{?RFC5681}}).

The RECOMMENDED value for kPersistentCongestionThreshold is 3, which is
approximately equivalent to two TLPs before an RTO in TCP.
As the value kPersistentCongestionThreshold gets larger, the sender becomes
increasingly unresponsive to persistent congestion in the network, which can
result in aggressive sending into a congested network. Too small a value can
result in a sender declaring persistent congestion unnecessarily, resulting in
reduced throughput for the sender.
janaiyengar marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

The RECOMMENDED value for kPersistentCongestionThreshold is 3, which results in
behavior that is approximately equivalent to a TCP sender declaring an RTO after
two TLPs.

This design does not use consecutive PTO events to establish persistent
congestion, since application patterns impact PTO expirations. For example, a
Expand Down