any updates to TCP RTO chapter and verse since 1122? - TCP-IP

This is a discussion on any updates to TCP RTO chapter and verse since 1122? - TCP-IP ; Have there been any updates to chapter and verse for the bounds of the TCP Retransmission Timeout since RFC1122? I did a cursory search of ietf.org and didn't see anything, but could have easily missed it. sincerely, rick jones -- ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: any updates to TCP RTO chapter and verse since 1122?

  1. any updates to TCP RTO chapter and verse since 1122?

    Have there been any updates to chapter and verse for the bounds of the
    TCP Retransmission Timeout since RFC1122? I did a cursory search of
    ietf.org and didn't see anything, but could have easily missed it.

    sincerely,

    rick jones
    --
    oxymoron n, commuter in a gas-guzzling luxury SUV with an American flag
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

  2. Re: any updates to TCP RTO chapter and verse since 1122?

    "Rick Jones" wrote:

    > Have there been any updates to chapter and verse for the bounds of the
    > TCP Retransmission Timeout since RFC1122? I did a cursory search of
    > ietf.org and didn't see anything, but could have easily missed it.


    The more recent discussions of which I'm aware are in RFCs 2581and 3168.
    RFC 3168 specifically addresses Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN),
    though, so maybe that's not what you're wondering about.

    Bert


  3. Re: any updates to TCP RTO chapter and verse since 1122?

    Albert Manfredi wrote:
    > "Rick Jones" wrote:


    > > Have there been any updates to chapter and verse for the bounds of the
    > > TCP Retransmission Timeout since RFC1122? I did a cursory search of
    > > ietf.org and didn't see anything, but could have easily missed it.


    > The more recent discussions of which I'm aware are in RFCs 2581and 3168.
    > RFC 3168 specifically addresses Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN),
    > though, so maybe that's not what you're wondering about.


    Indeed, those seem to address congestion control issues, but nothing
    new about the upper and lower bounds for the TCP RTO.

    thanks,

    rick jones
    --
    No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
    There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision. - Jobert
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

+ Reply to Thread