Could you elaborate in three or four sentences what you mean by "rwnd
control"?
It looks to me like the post you reference is talking about a change to
the TCP sender and not a PEP.
In any case, RFC 3135 is a "survey" document and, as such, is not intended
to capture every single possible "PEP" idea. It is just trying to get across
the concepts of the kinds of things that are done by a PEP (and the reasons
why they are used and the consequences of using them)...
John
Michele Milani wrote:
>
> Dear Sirs,
>
> my name is Michele milani and I work as a researcher at CEFRIEL, Politecnico
> di Milano, Italy.
>
> I'm "lurking" pilc ML from some months, but this is my first post. I think
> you're doing a very interesting and good job with pilc WG.
>
> I'm very interested in all pilc topics, but especially RFC 3135 and "TCP
> over 2.5G and 3G Wireless Networks" I-D attract my research interests.
>
> I have one question regarding PEPs: why RFC 3135 doesn't mention "rwnd
> control" as a mechanism PEPs can use to improve performance?
>
> I searched through the ML archive, but the only post regarding rwnd I could
> find is:
>
> Impact of Receiver Window
> From: Chadi M. BARAKAT
> Date: Fri Jul 30 1999
> http://pilc.grc.nasa.gov/pilc/list/archive/0388.html
>
> Let me know your comments.
>
> Cheers,
> Michele
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Michele Milani, Area E-service Technologies, CEFRIEL, Politecnico di Milano
> via Fucini 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
> Phone: +39-02-23954 210, Fax: +39-02-23954 410
> Email: milani@cefriel.it, Web: http://www.cefriel.it/~milani
> ___________________________________________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 09:12:29 EST