From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Nov 19 23:14:42 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C610A327C2; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:14:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hiren@strugglingcoder.info) Received: from mail.strugglingcoder.info (strugglingcoder.info [65.19.130.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.strugglingcoder.info", Issuer "mail.strugglingcoder.info" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B1611553; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:14:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hiren@strugglingcoder.info) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.1.1.3]) (Authenticated sender: hiren@strugglingcoder.info) by mail.strugglingcoder.info (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7DB56C4946; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:14:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:14:40 -0800 From: hiren panchasara To: Randall Stewart Cc: FreeBSD Transports , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: dupack counter processing Message-ID: <20151119231440.GE98283@strugglingcoder.info> References: <20151018003740.GE87252@strugglingcoder.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8TaQrIeukR7mmbKf" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151018003740.GE87252@strugglingcoder.info> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:14:42 -0000 --8TaQrIeukR7mmbKf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + freebsd-net as this deserves more eyeballs, imo. On 10/17/15 at 05:37P, hiren panchasara wrote: > On 10/07/15 at 12:17P, Randall Stewart via freebsd-transport wrote: > >=20 > > 2) When we recognize a dup-ack we *will not* recognize it if for exampl= e if the rwnd changes even > > if new SACK information is reported in the sack blocks. This is due= to the fact that in non-SACK you don?t > > (on purpose) recognize ACK?s where the window changed (since you ca= n?t really tell if its a > > plain window update or a dup-ack).. This means we occasionally mis= s out > > on stroking the dup-ack counter and getting out of recovery.... After a lot of discussion with Randall and colleagues at Limelight, here is the patch for review: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D4225 This changes the default behavior of how we detect loss. I'd appreciate review/comments. Cheers, Hiren --8TaQrIeukR7mmbKf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAABCgBmBQJWTlfcXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRBNEUyMEZBMUQ4Nzg4RjNGMTdFNjZGMDI4 QjkyNTBFMTU2M0VERkU1AAoJEIuSUOFWPt/l7tgIAKfxmxuhg/qh1TFQsb2fVk8m UYTHkQkeFmr7hGkyDVt4196D9yPzp8Xvdk7L5d5N3jKyErEBzBPlh9rHWVHsijA2 7v1H4KmNf9w8gYVTVSh727DcdWODJtJJEPDCn1bygaRV0UmaVxMjrbOUcub1fU+e EegM/n0eQlbDN2FD/GjLJu8HFw6M25Grwf2r56XO4/l7NvUqZGFxKYaa+mvcIZWe 7XJPsRtIpgKZJ2ZQ51BDzgpUSCl76bEJ9MjipJ6CbsF+Av5HBC7Bm5gu7TZKlCn6 EPWjPr+4AS8BDVTa6Ju92yD5q4SOQmRBjWB0dnr8a8w1vLhSGD1AEz4IJUmoCD8= =WsbP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8TaQrIeukR7mmbKf--