Have you looked at RFC 6298? Based on your last email<div>it looks like you were reading an obsoleted RFC.<br><div><br></div><div>I don't think this timer needs to be super accurate since</div><div>it kicks in only when duplicate ACKs don't already solve</div>
<div>the problem, e.g. under severe forward or reverse congestion</div><div>because of which ACKs aren't making it back.</div><div><br></div><div>Having it be a moving average just allows us to pick an</div><div>initial value that could be terribly wrong for the environment</div>
<div>(data center at one end, satellite links at the other end)</div><div>and we still find a reasonable value after a few RTT.</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Detlef Bosau <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:detlef.bosau@web.de">detlef.bosau@web.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br>
Perhaps, I should put my question in a more general way: In which cases do we have / do we expect a reliable RTO estimation in TCP sessions?<br>
<br>
Thanks!<br>
<br>
Detlef<br>
<br>
-- <br>
------------------------------<u></u>------------------------------<u></u>------<br>
Detlef Bosau<br>
Galileistraße 30 <br>
70565 Stuttgart Tel.: <a href="tel:%2B49%20711%205208031" value="+497115208031" target="_blank">+49 711 5208031</a><br>
mobile: <a href="tel:%2B49%20172%206819937" value="+491726819937" target="_blank">+49 172 6819937</a><br>
skype: detlef.bosau<br>
ICQ: 566129673<br><font color="#888888">
<a href="mailto:detlef.bosau@web.de" target="_blank">detlef.bosau@web.de</a> <a href="http://www.detlef-bosau.de" target="_blank">http://www.detlef-bosau.de</a><br>
------------------------------<u></u>------------------------------<u></u>------<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div></div>