TCP Implementation (tcpimpl)
----------------------------
Charter
Last Modified: 10/06/2000
Current Status: Concluded Working Group
Chair(s):
Vern Paxson <vern@aciri.org>
Mark Allman <mallman@lerc.nasa.gov>
Transport Area Director(s):
Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
Allison Mankin <mankin@isi.edu>
Transport Area Advisor:
Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion:tcp-impl@grc.nasa.gov
To Subscribe: majordomo@grc.nasa.gov
Archive: http://tcp-impl.grc.nasa.gov/tcp-impl
Description of Working Group:
The objective of this group is to decide how to best address known
problems in existing implementations of the current TCP standard(s) and
practices. The overall goal is to improve conditions in the existing
Internet by enhancing the quality of current TCP/IP implementations. It
is hoped that both performance and correctness issues can be resolved
by making implementors aware of the problems and their solutions. In
the long term, it is felt that this will provide a reduction in
unnecessary traffic on the network, the rate of connection failures due
to protocol errors, and load on network servers due to time spent
processing both unsuccessful connections and retransmitted data. This
will help to ensure the stability of the global Internet.
Examples of detected problems:
o TCPs that retransmit all unacknowledged data at a single time.
This behavior greatly adds to Internet load, at a time when
the network is already under stress. The combination can
lead to congestion collapse.
o TCPs that misinitialize the congestion window, leading to
potentially enormous bursts of traffic when new connections
begin. Such burstiness can greatly stress Internet routers.
In the BOF, it was generally agreed that problems of this class need
to be fixed.
Scope:
The scope of this group must be carefully defined in order to ensure
timely progress. To this end, TCP issues that still remain areas of
research are considered out of scope for the WG. For example new
improvements in congestion control algorithms are not within the WG
scope. The WG will solicit input from the End-To-End research group of
the IRTF on questions of whether a TCP implementation issue is
considered research.
The major objectives of this group will be to :
Produce a compilation of known problems and their solutions. This will
raise awareness of these issues.
Determine if any problems found are the result of ambiguities in the
TCP specification. If necessary, produce a document which clarifies
the specification.
Catalog existing TCP test suites, diagnostic tools, testing
organizations, and procedures that can be used by implementors to
improve their code, and produce a document enumerating them.
Goals and Milestones:
Done Working group formation. Decide on document editors.
Done Define schedule for producing the test suite catalog
Done First Internet-Draft of problems and fixes, and very rough
first draft of catalogue of test suites.
Done Issue revised Internet-Draft documents.
Done Cut-off for determining whether clarification document is
needed. If necessary, have interim meeting to focus effort
on clarification document.
Done Submit Internet-Draft of test catalogue to IESG for
publication as an RFC.
Done Submit Internet-Draft of problems and fixes to IESG for
publication as an RFC.
Done Submit Internet-Draft clarifying RFCs 793, 1122, and 1323
to IESG for publication as an RFC.
Done Submit Internet-Draft on increasing TCP's initial window
size for publication as an experimental RFC.
Done Submit Internet-Draft of test catalogue to IESG for
consideration as an informational RFC.
Done Submit I-Ds in support of larger initial window I-D to IESG
for consideration as an Informational RFCs
Done Begin work on revisions to RFC 2001.
Done Begin work on a security problems document (to be much like
the known problems I-D currently being developed).
Done Submit revised version of problems and fixes as an
Internet-Draft.
Done Submit problems and fixes document to IESG for
consideration as an Informational RFC.
Done Submit revision of RFC 2001 to IESG for publication as
Proposed Standard. Most likely this will include changes to
the initial window, reflecting experienced gained with the
Experimental initial window RFC. May include changes to
restart-after-idle behavior
Done submit Internet-Draft on problems with Path MTU discovery
to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC
Done Conclude Working Group
Internet-Drafts:
No Current Internet-Drafts.
Request For Comments:
RFC Stat Published Title
------- -- ----------- ------------------------------------
RFC2398 I AUG 98 Some Testing Tools for TCP Implementors
RFC2414 E SEP 98 Increasing TCP's Initial Window
RFC2415 I SEP 98 Simulation Studies of Increased Initial TCP Window
Size
RFC2416 I SEP 98 When TCP Starts Up With Four Packets Into Only Three
Buffers
RFC2525 I MAR 99 Known TCP Implementation Problems
RFC2582 E APR 99 The NewReno Modification to TCP's Fast Recovery
Algorithm
RFC2581 PS APR 99 TCP Congestion Control
RFC2923 I SEP 00 TCP Problems with Path MTU Discovery