Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: TCP / IP
From: lee.e.rian () census gov
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 02:34:58 -0400
D B <geggam692000 () yahoo com>wrote:
I am just a student learning about TCP/IP and dont know where to post this idea,
comp.protocols.tcp/ip would probably be better http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&group=comp.protocols.tcp-ip
figured posting it here would get me some flames and links. Why not make the window the size of the file to be transmitted and the ack back have the segments missing thereby reducing overall overhead and lag time.
sounds like you re-invented selective ack. Take a look at RFC 2018 http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html
ie host1 1mb file --- sent -- > host2 host1 <-- ack missing 3 6 8 segments -- host2 host1 -- segments 3 6 8 sent ---> host2 host1 <-- FIN --- host2 The window could be dynamic according to content size. Buffers would have to be huge but with RAM so cheap these days why not ?
RAM may be cheap but no matter how much you have, it's still a finite resource; eventually you will fill up the buffers. And even if the buffers are sufficiently large that you don't fill them up you run into problems of queueing time. With sufficiently large buffers packets can sit in the output queue longer than the sending hosts' retransmit timeout value. Slow start is a Good Thing :-)
or am I smoking newbie crack ?
nah - good ideas Regards, Lee
Dan
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- TCP / IP D B (Oct 16)
- Re: TCP / IP Honza Vlach (Oct 17)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: TCP / IP D B (Oct 16)
- Re: TCP / IP lee . e . rian (Oct 16)