Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 27 Oct 2022 21:33:02 +0200
From:      tuexen@freebsd.org
To:        "Scheffenegger, Richard" <Richard.Scheffenegger@netapp.com>
Cc:        Tom Jones <thj@freebsd.org>, Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, Zhenlei Huang <zlei.huang@gmail.com>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Too aggressive TCP ACKs
Message-ID:  <A9530F4C-E076-4390-ABB2-00950AB6A927@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR06MB76395048D836D4D19D03DC4686339@PH0PR06MB7639.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
References:  <75D35F36-7759-4168-ADBA-C2414F5B53BC@gmail.com> <712641B3-5196-40CC-9B64-04637F16F649@lurchi.franken.de> <62A0DD30-B3ED-48BE-9C01-146487599092@gmail.com> <0FED34A9-D093-442A-83B7-08C06D11F8B5@lurchi.franken.de> <330A9146-F7CC-4CAB-9003-2F90B872AC3E@gmail.com> <1ed66217-5463-fd4d-7e7a-58d9981bc44c@selasky.org> <Y1j2ZzHaFt/YA5Et@spacemonster> <4E92E238-798B-4293-B0D2-81E3FCB92E34@freebsd.org> <Y1kvNBMedJtrs6yo@spacemonster> <701FC3D6-7AFE-46F6-977D-75CAD34646D4@freebsd.org> <PH0PR06MB76395048D836D4D19D03DC4686339@PH0PR06MB7639.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> On 27. Oct 2022, at 10:08, Scheffenegger, Richard <Richard.Scheffenegger@netapp.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>> It focuses on QUIC, but congestion control dynamics don't change 
>>>>> with the protocol. You should be able to read there, but if not I'm 
>>>>> happy to send anyone a pdf.
>>>> Is QUIC using an L=2 for ABC?
>>> 
>>> I think that is the rfc recommendation, actual deployed reality is 
>>> more scattershot.
>> Wouldn't that be relevant? If you get an ack for, let's say 8 packets, you would only increment (in slow start) the cwnd by 2 packets, not 8?
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Michael
> 
> Isn't that the optimization in Linux with QuickAck during the periods, where the data receiver assumes, that the sender is still in SlowStart - and acking every packet?
Sure. But that is not specified... I just wanted to point out that simply
"Changing the ACK ratio seems to be okay in most cases" might be more complex
than the sentence reads...

Best regards
Michael

> 
> Richard
> 




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A9530F4C-E076-4390-ABB2-00950AB6A927>