Re: a vote for asymmetric connections in a session

["John Hufferd/San Jose/IBM" <hufferd@us.ibm.com>]

If, at the approprate time, David were to call consensus in favor of the
Asymmetric case, I think this whole issue of the Sliding Window would go
away (at least with regard to its original purpose).  Do you folks agree
with that statement?

.
.
.
John L. Hufferd



"Matt Wakeley" <matt_wakeley@agilent.com>@ece.cmu.edu on 09/07/2000
03:46:53 PM

Please respond to Matt Wakeley <matt_wakeley@agilent.com>

Sent by:  owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu


To:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
cc:
Subject:  Re: a vote for asymmetric connections in a session



As Julian has stated in a different thread, the purpose of the "sliding
windows" in iSCSI is not for congestion management.  It is simply there to
handle the case where if a connection goes down in a multiple connection
session, it prevents the remaining connections from overwhelming the target
with new commands that it can't process due to missing commands that where
on
the broken connection.

Since all of this runs on top of TCP, and TCP performs congestion
management,
why must iSCSI perform congestion management on top of TCP?

-Matt Wakeley
Agilent Technologies

Scott Bradner wrote:

> > Implementing sliding windows is not that hard
>
> note that the issue is not "just" sliding windows - ips also has to deal
> with congestion TCP-friendly way - that can get quite complicated
>
> Scott