[e2e] Question on ssthresh setting in RFC 2581

[Ted Faber]

On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 08:53:13AM +1200, Ian McDonald wrote:
> >Are there actually stacks who change, i.e. decrease, cwnd when cwnd is
> >not fully used?
> >
> >
> I believe Packeteer used to do this. Not sure if it still does.

I was under the perhaps-mistaken impression that Packeteer rewrote the
advertised window field in packets in flight.  They caused senders to
slow down by limiting rwnd, not cwnd.  It seems likely that the
designers of the advertised window did not forsee this use of the
field, but you never know.  I've been told in private e-mail that
senders have been encouraged to ignore rwnd in the past.

-- 
Ted Faber
http://www.isi.edu/~faber           PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc
Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20060517/348054cd/attachment.bin