Not as far as I know. Lars
On 2014-8-27, at 9:39, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote: > Is there a PR for it? > > > -a > > > On 27 August 2014 00:23, Eggert, Lars <l...@netapp.com> wrote: >> It would be great if people could also review Aris' PRR patch - RFC6937 has >> been out for a while. >> >> Lars >> >> >> >> >> On 2014-8-26, at 20:09, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>> I'm going to merge Tom's work in a week unless someone gives me a >>> really good reason not to. >>> >>> I think there's been enough work and discussion about it since the >>> first post from Lars in Feburary and enough review opportunity. >>> >>> >>> -a >>> >>> >>> On 26 August 2014 07:55, Tom Jones <jo...@sdf.org> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:43:49PM +0000, Eggert, Lars wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> the newcwv patch is probably stale now with Tom Jones' recent patch based >>>>> on >>>>> a more up-to-date version of the Internet-Draft, but the PRR patch should >>>>> still be useful? >>>> >>>> My newcwv patch is much more up to date than Aris's, but it is slightly >>>> different in implementation. I have had a few suggestions from Adrian, but >>>> he >>>> couldn't comment on how it relates to the tcp internals. >>>> >>>> There is a PR: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191520 >>>> >>>> The biggest difference in structure between mine and Aris's patch is the >>>> use of >>>> tcp timers. It would be good to hear if my approach or Aris's is prefered. >>>> >>>>> On 2014-6-19, at 23:35, George Neville-Neil <g...@neville-neil.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 4 Feb 2014, at 1:38, Eggert, Lars wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> below are two patches that implement RFC6937 ("Proportional Rate >>>>>>> Reduction for TCP") and draft-ietf-tcpm-newcwv-00 ("Updating TCP to >>>>>>> support Rate-Limited Traffic"). They were done by Aris >>>>>>> Angelogiannopoulos for his MS thesis, which is at >>>>>>> https://eggert.org/students/angelogiannopoulos-thesis.pdf. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The patches should apply to -CURRENT as of Sep 17, 2013. (Sorry for the >>>>>>> delay in sending them, we'd been trying to get some feedback from >>>>>>> committers first, without luck.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please note that newcwv is still a work in progress in the IETF, and >>>>>>> the patch has some limitations with regards to the "pipeACK Sampling >>>>>>> Period" mentioned in the Internet-Draft. Aris says this in his thesis >>>>>>> about what exactly he implemented: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "The second implementation choice, is in regards with the measurement >>>>>>> of pipeACK. This variable is the most important introduced by the >>>>>>> method and is used to compute the phase that the sender currently lies >>>>>>> in. In order to compute pipeACK the approach suggested by the Internet >>>>>>> Draft (ID) is followed [ncwv]. During initialization, pipeACK is set to >>>>>>> the maximum possible value. A helper variable prevHighACK is introduced >>>>>>> that is initialized to the initial sequence number (iss). prevHighACK >>>>>>> holds the value of the highest acknowledged byte so far. pipeACK is >>>>>>> measured once per RTT meaning that when an ACK covering prevHighACK is >>>>>>> received, pipeACK becomes the difference between the current ACK and >>>>>>> prevHighACK. This is called a pipeACK sample. A newer version of the >>>>>>> draft suggests that multiple pipeACK samples can be used during the >>>>>>> pipeACK sampling period." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lars >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [prr.patch] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [newcwv.patch] >>>>>> >>>>>> Apologies for not looking at this as yet. It is now closer to the top >>>>>> of my list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> George >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tom >>>> @adventureloop >>>> adventurist.me >>>> >>>> :wq >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
