[e2e] Comparing different TCP flavours?

[Martin Karsten]

During the years of TCP development, have there been systematic comparative
studies of TCP performance of different TCP flavours - Tahoe, (New)Reno,
Sack - in a "closed setting"?

It seems to be easy to find work comparing TCP flavours with a focus on the
performance of individual flows under a significant amount of "black-box"
background traffic. Also, there is some work on the behaviour of "many" TCP
flows, but only considering a single TCP flavour (i.e. no systematic
comparison). Same for investigating individual parameters, like buffer
space, etc. Finally, there is all the work on TCP variants over wireless
links.

However, I am wondering whether there has been any (simulation) research on
comparing plain TCP performance where
- all traffic is created by monitored TCP sources (i.e. no black-box
  background traffic)
- there is dynamic arrival of (finite-size) TCP flows, rather than a fixed
  set of long-lived flows that run from the beginning to the end of a
  simulation experiment
- overall network efficiency is measured, e.g. in terms of when (on average)
  each/all/most/etc. TCP transactions are completed, rather than studying
  the temporary rate allocation(s) to individual flow(s)
- TCP flavours and configuration parameters are systematically enumerated

Of course I understand that the above goals are not trivial to accomplish.

Alternatively, I would be delighted to be convinced that the above is not
necessary, because the relative overall resource efficiency can be
established otherwise.

I'd be grateful for any pointers.

Many thanks,
Martin