[e2e] Reasons not to deply TCP BIC/Cubic
Barry Constantine
Barry.Constantine at jdsu.com
Wed Nov 30 04:23:44 PST 2011
Hi Saverio,
Does Windows 7 use this TCP implementation as well?
Thank you,
Barry Constantine
-----Original Message-----
From: end2end-interest-bounces at postel.org [mailto:end2end-interest-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of mascolo at poliba.it
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 6:11 AM
To: end2end-interest at postel.org
Subject: [e2e] Reasons not to deply TCP BIC/Cubic
Dear all,
we know that TCP BIC/Cubic is default in Linux and as a consequence
50% of servers employs TCP BIC/Cubic.
Our measurements say that there could be reasons not to deploy TCP
BIC/Cubic. These reasons are in our opinion rooted in its more
aggressive probing phase. In particular, in common network conditions,
TCP BIC/CUBIC exhibits: 1. a larger RTT average wrt to TCP NewReno or
TCP Westwood+; 2. a larger number of retransmission wrt to TCP NewReno
or TCP Westwood+; 3 larger throughput but same goodput wrt to TCP
NewReno or Westwood+.
In other terms, it seems that its more aggressive probing increases
both throughput and retransmissions but leaving unchanged the goodput.
This is neutral for the users but negative for the network.
I appreciate your views.
Thanks for the attention and best regards,
Saverio Mascolo
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
More information about the end2end-interest
mailing list