Subject: Re: [tcpm] ECN for SYN/ACK draft

From: Sally Floyd <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:36:46 -0800

Janardhan -

Many thanks for the feedback.

>I have read the draft, and it looks good to me except for one part that 
>needs clarification. Section 4, last para:
>
>    "As a final step, [ECN+] explored the co-existence of flows that do
>    and don't set the ECN-capable codepoint in TCP SYN/ACK packets.  The
>    results in [ECN+] confirmed that both types of flows can coexist;
>    flows that apply the change improve their end-to-end performance,
>    while the performance degradation for flows that don't apply the
>    change, as a result of the flows that do apply the change, is
>    marginal."
>
>Is this comparison the one in Figure 10 in the SIGCOMM paper? If so, I'm 
>not sure if it would be correct to say that the performance degradation 
>for flows that don't apply the change is "marginal". I like "gradual" 
>instead, as used in the paper. Maybe "gradually significant". Let me know 
>if I'm way off.

I think that you are quite right.  We will revise that paragraph.
We are also planning on adding some simulations exploring worst-case
scenarios of the addition of ECN-Capability to some SYN/ACK packets
negatively affecting the performance of other traffic, just to be
quite clear about what could and couldn't happen.

Again, many thanks.

- Sally
http://www.icir.org/floyd/

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm