... I agree 100% with Eddie on these two (1. "we should get rid of ICMP feedback in the long run", 2. "combine PMTUD with ECN") issues.
Cheers, Michael On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 02:39, Eddie Kohler wrote: > Hi Fred, > > * PLPMTUD is useful. > * Designing PMTUD so that it works in the absence of ICMP feedback seems > necessary. > > BUT > > * Suitable ICMP feedback hints might significantly improve the performance > of a transport protocol. > * We can program our transports to react to ICMP as a hint -- i.e., not > trust it, but use it to optimize performance. > * So ICMP should not be "needed", but it might, and probably would, be quite > helpful in some cases. > * For instance, not all packetization layers have as easy a time as TCP > with packet size changes. The smooth ramp-up suggested in PLPMTUD may > require intervention from the application for example. For good > performance, these applications may apply PMTUD in unexpected ways -- > they might start large, for example. ICMP feedback would really help > them. > * ICMP is not a significant cause of Internet congestion and need not ever > become one (mark it less-than-best-effort). > > I still think your overloading of ECN capable as "PLPMTUD capable, don't > send ICMP" is not necessary, a bad idea, and will not fly. > > Eddie > > _______________________________________________ > pmtud mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmtud -- Michael Welzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> University of Innsbruck -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
