Aug. 6th, 2014

andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker: (Default)
I was reading about TCP, congestion, etc. because of some presentation slides (which I wish I had the notes for, because I'd like the explanations that go with some of them.

And I realised that there was an inefficiency I was seeing. And the reason may be historical, or (entirely likely) something I'm just overlooking.

Why does _every_ packet requires an acknowledgement packet? Chances are that most packets are travelling as part of a set of packets - probably the maximum possible for the window size. So rather than taking up bandwidth sending back a load of them, why not delay a trivial amount of time after the first packet arrives and then acknowledge the highest number for which you have all of the previous packets?

You wouldn't want to delay long - but then you shouldn't need to - you'd generally expect that the next n packets would be arriving immediately behind each other, so acknowledging only only once every n milliseconds should work pretty effectively.

So if packets 2-6 arrive, send an ACK saying "*6" (or some equivalent signal), rather than five separate acks? I know ACK packets are tiny, but it still seems wasteful.

Anyone who's knowledgable in the area care to fill me in?

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 7th, 2025 12:56 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios