On Tuesday, March 19, 2013, Detlef Bosau wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Am 19.03.2013 00:39, schrieb Detlef Bosau:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>
>From what you say it becomes clear, that "congestion control" pursues at least three goals.<br>
<br>
1.: Stability (in the sense of "no congestion loss").<br>
2.: Probing/Tuning (to the knee or to the cliff, that doesn't really matter here).<br>
3.: Resource sharing / scheduling.<br>
<br>
These goals are intertwined, while the first one is the easiest to accomplish: Simply obey the conservation principle and you're done.<br>
<br>
The interesting issues are the second and the third one.<br>
<br>
Particularly for the third one, I'm not quite sure whether we really focus on the correct resource here.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
O.k., in some private mail, I was told that all these three goals are wrong, so I conclude that none of the aforementioned points is a goal of<br>
congestion control. Obviously, I did not understand any of the papers and PhD theses I read through the last decade.<br>
<br>
Hence, the remaining question is: Why do we need congestion control?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My answer: Our goal is to enhance overall user experience, and CC aids this because it allows differential treatment of traffic types, and enhances goodput within each type.</div>
<div><br></div><div>swb</div>