With reference to Aaron Falk's mail excerpted below:
Recently several analyses have been published
that account for correlated losses (for example, as would occur
in wireless fading channels). The results are quite different from
those obtained for independent and identically distributed losses.
As would be expected, in addition to the *average* bit error rate,
the lengths of the good and bad periods of the channel become important.
It turns out that rapid fading and very slow fading are both better
than fade rates comparable to the RTT. If the link layer is always
able to recover from losses, then essentially it is as if TCP sees
a bottleneck link with a time varying bit rate.
My papers on this topic an be found at http://ece.iisc.ernet.in/~anurag
There are other papers by Zorzi & Rao (CISS 97 or 98 ?), Anjum and Tassiulas
(Sigmetrics 99). And I am sure there are other papers too.
-- Anurag
On Wed, 31 Mar 1999 [email protected] wrote:
> Jamshid-
>
> Thank you for raising an important point. Not all bit errors are equivalent.
> Most (all?) satellite links utilize FEC. Block coding results in lost blocks
> when uncorrectable errors occur. The packet loss rate due to corrupted blocks is
> much different that that due to a uniform distribution of bit errors. So, the
> translation of channel BER (after FEC) to packet loss rate (which is necessary
> to interpret the results of the reference below will depend heavily on the
> adaptation of IP to link layer.
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
Anurag Kumar |e-mail: [email protected]
Professor |Phone: (+91)-80-334 0855 or
and Coordinator ERNET Project | (+91)-80-309 2387
Dept. of Electrical Communication Engg. (ECE)|Fax: (+91)-80-334 7991 or
Indian Institute of Science (IISc) | (+91)-80-334 1683
Bangalore, 560 012, INDIA |http://ece.iisc.ernet.in/~anurag
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 14 2000 - 16:14:54 EST