Increasing TCP's Initial Window
draft-ietf-tcpm-initcwnd-07
| The information below is for an old version of the document | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (tcpm WG) | |
| Last updated | 2013-01-28 | ||
| Replaces | draft-hkchu-tcpm-initcwnd | ||
| Stream | IETF | ||
| Intended RFC status | Experimental | ||
| Formats | plain text pdf html bibtex | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | None | ||
| IESG | IESG state | IESG Evaluation::AD Followup | |
| Consensus Boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date |
Needs a YES. |
||
| Responsible AD | Wesley Eddy | ||
| IESG note | Yoshifumi Nishida (nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp) is the Document Shepherd for this document. | ||
| Send notices to | tcpm-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-tcpm-initcwnd@tools.ietf.org | ||
Internet Draft J. Chu
draft-ietf-tcpm-initcwnd-07.txt N. Dukkipati
Intended status: Experimental Y. Cheng
M. Mathis
Expiration date: July 2013 Google, Inc.
January 28, 2013
Increasing TCP's Initial Window
Status of this Memo
Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on May, 2013.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Chu, et. al. Expires July 2013 [Page 1]
Internet Draft Increasing TCP's Initial Window January 2013
Abstract
This document proposes an experiment to increase the permitted TCP
initial window (IW) from between 2 and 4 segments, as specified in
RFC 3390, to 10 segments, with a fallback to the existing
recommendation when performance issues are detected. It discusses the
motivation behind the increase, the advantages and disadvantages of
the higher initial window, and presents results from several large
scale experiments showing that the higher initial window improves the
overall performance of many web services without resulting in a
congestion collapse. The document closes with a discussion of usage
and deployment for further experimental purpose recommended by the
IETF TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions (TCPM) working group.
Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. TCP Modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Implementation Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Advantages of Larger Initial Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1 Reducing Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2 Keeping up with the growth of web object size . . . . . . . 8
5.3 Recovering faster from loss on under-utilized or wireless
links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Disadvantages of Larger Initial Windows for the Network . . . 9
8. Mitigation of Negative Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. Interactions with the Retransmission Timer . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. Experimental Results From Large Scale Cluster Tests . . . . . 10
10.1 The benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.2 The cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11. Other Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
12. Usage and Deployment Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
13. Related Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
15. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
16. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Show full document text