> My contention is that since this is already happening, consolidating the ACK > packets into stretched ACKs doesn't make this any worse, and it saves network > bandwidth (and decreases latency to the extent that data is acked faster than > waiting for the entire chain or original ACKs to get through, especially if > that would take multiple transmit windows). As a result, thinning the ACKs is > kinder to the network.
I agree, *iff* they are not DupACKs signalling packet loss. Do existing and future cable modems take that subtle distinction into account? I presume that they are not discarding DupACKs or corrupting SACK in some way (the whole point of specialized ACK handling is to ensure good TCP performance after all), but since the algorithms are proprietary, for existing cable modems I don't know. I will contact the developers as well as run some tests on a few modems to get a better idea (and maybe Mikael already has some data from his recent testing he could share?). For future modems, I can add an explicit reference to RFC3449 in the DOCSIS 3.1 spec just in case implementers aren't aware for some reason.
_______________________________________________ aqm mailing list aqm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
