Talk:TCP congestion-avoidance algorithm

message: Also, upon further enquiry into this matter, I have noticed that in nearly all descriptions of TCP Tahoe that I have found, it DOES contain the fast re-transmit algorithm, activated after 3 dupacks. So that the most significant change from TCP Tahoe to TCP Reno is the fast recovery algorithm. One of the last places where I read this was: http://inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~ee122/fa05/projects/Project2/proj2_spec_files/sacks.pdf
This is so goddamn confusing and frustrating, and it's been preventing me from writing my assignment for nearly 2 days now, I wish someone could clear this up!
[Nicolas] 81.82.21.18 (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  TCP Tahoe mistake 

message: In the text before I changed it, it said that the receiving of duplicate packets meant that a packet was lost. Although
this is usually the case, this is not correct. It's possible that the stream just got reordered, prompting the receiver to
send the same ACK again and again because it still _expects_ the next packet in line, not the ones that it's receiving all the time.
Wikipedia sure had me confused, as I read both this article and multiple other sources, and didn't know what to think. But I think
I got it right now. Also I don't know how to insert my user info.
[Nicolas]  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.82.21.18 (talk) 12:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Somewhat true statement 

message: SlowStart
* SlowStart exists to avoid congestion at startup, not to avoid wasting time. Otherwise you would start at a higher value (not 2MSS) to get things going.
* You dont enter Congestion Avoidance after a packet loss, but after reaching a SlowStart Threshold.
* Packet Loss is also detected by Timeout
Actually, packet loss is detected only by timeout. Triple duplicate ACKs (i.e. 4 ACKs with the same sequence number) are only used for Fast Retransmit. Herr Baum 19:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TCP Tahoe and Reno 

message: XCP sounds good, but has some bad behavior, especially in dynamically changing network scenarios. The "mathematical" results in the XCP dissertation considering the scenarios in which XCP can be used are not worth to be read (I have to write this so hard). If five parameters can vary in a large range, it is absolutely nonsense to fix four of them in a middle range to show that XCP works over a wide range for the fith one. In most realistic scenarios at least two of the parameters are far away from their "middle value". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.247.68.155 (talk) 03:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  XCP 

message: What is triple-ack ?
triple-ack currently redirects to TCP congestion avoidance algorithm,
which doesn't even mention the word.
Is the explanation of what it is supposed to be in this article,
or should triple-ack redirect to some other article?
The article does mention "the missing packet that was signaled by 3 duplicate ACKs".
Is that the same as a "triple-ack"?
The explanation is too brief to make any sense.
I thought the reciever only sent an ACK for a received (non-missing) packet.
Why would a missing packet generate even 1 ACK, much less 3 ACKs ?
--68.0.120.35 00:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  triple-ack 

message: Given it is now the default algorithm for Linux and Linux runs a plurality of internet sites, I think this algorithm now has the *notability* to get equal billing. --Treekids 22:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections, so I promoted BIC (and the new default CUBIC) out of the ghetto --Treekids (talk) 18:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BIC and CUBIC notability 

message: http://netsrv.csc.ncsu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/BIC stats:
"Since Linux 2.6.13, BIC had been included in the standard Linux distribution and set to the default TCP. " 
so either they are wrong or this one:
"BIC is used by default in Linux kernels 2.6.8 through 2.6.18."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.195.89.218 (talk) 06:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linux default version 

message: Is anyone familiar enough to include a section on TCP Fusion ?  It seems to be based on a combination of TCP Reno, TCP Vegas, and TCP Westwoord (also new to me).  I haven't found too much on TCP Fusion however (probably because it's not implemented in the Linux kernel yet). SDNick484 (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  TCP Fusion 

message: Is the initial window for Tahoe and Reno really 2 MSS in size? In our class, we said it was 1 MSS. The French Wikipedia seems to say 1 MSS too (but my French isn't that great, so I might have misunderstood it). 131.246.161.187 (talk) 10:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial window 

message: There is a grammatical error with the use of plural in the sentence "The two algorithms were retrospectively named after the 4.3BSD operating system in which each first appeared (which were themselves named after Lake Tahoe and the nearby city of Reno, Nevada)." Should it be "...after releases of the 4.3BSD operating system..." instead of "...after the 4.3BSD operating system..."? I.e. are Tahoe and Reno releases of the 4.3BSD operating system and did TCP Tahoe first appear in 4.3BSD-Tahoe and TCP Reno in 4.3BSD-Reno?80.235.83.183 (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammatical error