Folks-
I think section 4.2 of the 2.5g/3g document is confusing. And, it
is likely because there is a difference between the initial cwnd on
standards track and the initial window in experimental documents. I
think the language can be cleaned up if RFC 2414.bis is published
(as a proposed standard) before this document (so, we can make a
concrete recommendation).
We (Sally Floyd, Craig Partridge and I) have submitted
draft-ietf-tsvwg-initwin-01.txt to the IESG. The document has been
last called once and we revised it per some small-ish comments from
Allison. I think we (the authors) expect this to go forward to the
RFC editor soon.
So, Allison- Can you tell us what the status of the initial window
I-D is? And, if it is reasonable to edit the 2.5g/3g document to
reflect what the new initial window RFC will say (since 2.5g/3g will
-- hopefully -- enter the queue after the initial window ID)?
Thanks,
allman
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 16 2002 - 00:24:27 EST