[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: shim-aware transports
At 02:13 AM 20/08/2005, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 17-aug-2005, at 17:31, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
when we were discussing TCP in TRIGTRAN, we pretty quickly converged on
NOT notifying transports when bandwidth available changed, because TCPs
have to respond to losses, and adding additional hints just adds stack
complexity beyond the complexity that is unavoidable.
Well, I'm sorry to have to say it, but that's just STUPID.
... FWIW, I never said I thought it was the right answer :-)
But my point in writing was mostly to say that I encourage postponing
"transport-aware" work until we make some progress on "transport-unaware"
SHIM6, and then making sure that, wherever the work gets done, we are
working closely with the transport community to meet their needs with
protocol mechanisms they will actually make use of.
And that approach and relative priorities within the charter is, I trust,
pretty much where we are today.