| Gerrit -
|
| > Fix:
| >
| > Avoid any backlog of sending time which is greater than one whole
| > t_ipi. This
| > permits the coarse-granularity bursts mentioned in [RFC 3448, 4.6],
| > but disallows
| > the disproportionally large bursts.
|
| Gerrit -
|
| I have revised
Quoting Sally Floyd:
| > (2) One needs to ensure that the TFRC minimum rates are not under-run
| > by doing
| > oscillation prevention (which is possible with integer arithmetic
| > when
| > sqrt(R_sample) > R_sqmean): something like
| >
| > X_inst = X * R_sqmean / sqrt(R_
I still believe the Limited recv rate does not solve the problem. I shall
address this problem tomorrow in the meeting for Sally's view.
Arjuna
-Original Message-
From: Gerrit Renker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 March 2007 15:54
To: Sally Floyd
Cc: DCCP mailing list
Subject: [dccp]
| Gerrit -
|
| I have revised draft-ietf-dccp-rfc3448bis-02b.txt
|
("http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-ietf-dccp-rfc3448bis
-02b.txt")
| to say the following:
|
| However, the TFRC sender is not allowed to accumulate
| `credits' of more than max(t_ipi, t_gran) time units in
Arjuna -
I still believe the Limited recv rate does not solve the problem. I
shall
address this problem tomorrow in the meeting for Sally's view.
Unfortunately, I am not going to be at IETF this week, so I think we
have to do this by email.
The current draft of draft-ietf-dccp-rfc3448bis doe
Dear Sally,
Yes I know that you are not going (unfortunately) to be here for the
meeting. I wanted to address this issue in the meeting but I guess I would
email this.
I tried reading the latest version of the draft in a hurry - so I am not
sure if this fundamental problem has been resolved.
Sa
Gerrit -
The changes look good, thank you. But I noticed that the entire
algorithm in section
4.3 has changed: the first feedback / first feedback packet after
nofeedback timer
expiry are no longer ignored; the Limited Receive Rate flag is
completely new;
and there are references to the Faste
Dear Sally,
Yes I know that you are not going (unfortunately) to be here for the
meeting. I wanted to address this issue in the meeting but I guess I
would
email this.
I tried reading the latest version of the draft in a hurry - so I am
not
sure if this fundamental problem has been resolved.
