%% You should probably cite rfc7661 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-tcpm-newcwv-04, number = {draft-ietf-tcpm-newcwv-04}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-newcwv/04/}, author = {Gorry Fairhurst and Arjuna Sathiaseelan and Raffaello Secchi}, title = {{Updating TCP to support Rate-Limited Traffic}}, pagetotal = 21, year = 2013, month = dec, day = 16, abstract = {This document proposes an update to RFC 5681 to address issues that arise when TCP is used to support traffic that exhibits periods where the sending rate is limited by the application rather than the congestion window. It updates TCP to allow a TCP sender to restart quickly following either an idle or rate-limited interval. This method is expected to benefit applications that send rate-limited traffic using TCP, while also providing an appropriate response if congestion is experienced. It also evaluates the Experimental specification of TCP Congestion Window Validation, CWV, defined in RFC 2861, and concludes that RFC 2861 sought to address important issues, but failed to deliver a widely used solution. This document therefore recommends that the status of RFC 2861 is moved from Experimental to Historic, and that it is replaced by the current specification. NOTE: The standards status of this WG document is under review for consideration as either Experimental (EXP) or Proposed Standard (PS). This decision will be made later as the document is finalised.}, }