Re: Urgent as Framing Hint?

[Matt Wakeley <matt_wakeley@agilent.com>]

"Randall R. Stewart" wrote:

> I am not sure what you mena by "work to a degree". I am quite sure
> after looking at TCP and hearing feedback from David Reed, that in
> ALL TCP implementations your idea will work a lot of the times. But
> I am also just as sure that your idea will NOT work when faced with
> a more than one packet loss..
> 
> If working with only single packet losses is what you had in mind
> then I am sure it will "work to a degree" right now.

This is exactly the case I wanted to handle.  

> The real
> question is do you want a solution that will break under heavy
> load with multiple packet losses?

In this case, performance is going to suffer from all the packet losses
anyway, so it would be ok in such circumstances to switch back to the standard
TCP recovery algorithm.

> I currently prefer the "magic sequence" proposal where you have
> a special escape sequence you can look for inside the data stream.
> I am not sure that this is managable for 10Gb data streams since
> it will involve a lot of horse power to do it.. but so far it
> is the only solution I can see that works reliably (if you have
> enough CPU)...

This would be real easy to do in hardware.  But it will really kill the
software implementations.

-Matt

> 
> R
> --
> Randall R. Stewart
> randall@stewart.chicago.il.us or rrs@cisco.com
> 815-342-5222 (cell) 815-477-2127 (work)