The issue here is that the hosts don't know how the medium is going to
do the clumping, so thinning the ACKs at the host may add additional delay.
From what I understand from Greg's earlier message the cable modem must
request uplink bandwidth in advance, so if it had to send multiple ACKs,
True, assuming that they will all fit in the next burst.
but sending all of them lengthens the transmission compared to only sending the
minimum, which consumes airtime that that or some other station could be using
for data. With congestion of the airwaves such a significant problem, being
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015, David Lang wrote:
Ok, so it turns out that what we are talking about here is talked about
explicitly in section 5.2.1 of RFC3449. It warns of increased sender
burst sizes, but I really question if that's a valid concern in the
cases that we are talking about here. The
RFC3449 pointed to some of the reasons & problems with manipulating TCP
ACKs, and could provide a useful background if people needed to get up to
speed on the history...
Gorry
> I'm not sure why this discussion is happening on aqm@ instead of tcpm@...
> I have added cpm to the cc line, and would
Ok, so it turns out that what we are talking about here is talked about
explicitly in section 5.2.1 of RFC3449. It warns of increased sender burst
sizes, but I really question if that's a valid concern in the cases that we are
talking about here. The choice in these cases isn't to send more
