Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 0/2] tcp: Redundant Data Bundling (RDB)

> On 10 Mar 2016, at 03:27, Yuchung Cheng wrote: > > So my question is still if thin-stream app has enough inflight to use > ack-triggered recovery. i.e., it has to send at least twice within an > RTT. > I see. The thin-stream app must send twice before an RTO in order to

Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 0/2] tcp: Redundant Data Bundling (RDB)

cket 2 (which will contain 1+2), packet 3 (1+2+3) and packet 4 (1+2+3+4). So the fact that packet 1 was lost is masqueraded when it is recovered by packet 2 and there won’t be any gap in the SACK window indicating that packet 1 was lost. Best regards, Jonas Markussen

Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB)

On 26 Oct 2015, at 22:58, Yuchung Cheng wrote: > but would RDB be voided if this developer turns on RDB then turns on > Nagle later? The short answer is answer is "kind of" My understanding is that Nagle will delay segments until they're either MSS-sized or until segments

Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 0/2] tcp: Redundant Data Bundling (RDB)

> On 24 Oct 2015, at 08:11, Yuchung Cheng wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Bendik Rønning Opstad > wrote: >> >> This is a request for comments. >> >> Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) is a mechanism for TCP aimed at reducing >> the latency for