----- On Jun 30, 2020, at 4:56 PM, Eric Dumazet eduma...@google.com wrote: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:44 PM David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> >> From: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com> >> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:39:27 -0700 >> >> > The (C) & (B) case are certainly doable. >> > >> > A) case is more complex, I have no idea of breakages of various TCP >> > stacks if a flow got SACK >> > at some point (in 3WHS) but suddenly becomes Reno. >> >> I agree that C and B are the easiest to implement without having to >> add complicated code to handle various negotiated TCP option >> scenerios. >> >> It does seem to be that some entities do A, or did I misread your >> behavioral analysis of various implementations Mathieu? >> >> Thanks. > > Yes, another question about Mathieu cases is do determine the behavior > of all these stacks vs : > SACK option > TCP TS option.
I will ask my customer's networking team to investigate these behaviors, which will allow me to prepare a thorough reply to the questions raised by Eric and David. I expect to have an answer within 2-3 weeks at most. Thank you! Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
