Many assumptions that are true when no reordering or other
strange events happen are not a part of the RFC3517. FACK
implementation is based on such assumptions. Previously (before
the rewrite) the non-FACK SACK was basically doing fast rexmit
and then it times out all skbs when first cumulative ACK arrives,
which cannot really be called SACK based recovery :-).
RFC3517 SACK disables these things:
- Per SKB timeouts & head timeout entry to recovery
- Marking at least one skb while in recovery (RFC3517 does this
only for the fast retransmission but not for the other skbs
when cumulative ACKs arrive in the recovery)
- Sacktag's loss detection flavors B and C (see comment before
tcp_sacktag_write_queue)
This does not implement the "last resort" rule 3 of NextSeg, which
allows retransmissions also when not enough SACK blocks have yet
arrived above a segment for IsLost to return true [RFC3517].
The implementation differs from RFC3517 in these points:
- Rate-halving is used instead of FlightSize / 2
- Instead of using dupACKs to trigger the recovery, the number
of SACK blocks is used as FACK does with SACK blocks+holes
(which provides more accurate number). It seems that the
difference can affect negatively only if the receiver does not
generate SACK blocks at all even though it claimed to be
SACK-capable.
- Dupthresh is not a constant one. Dynamical adjustments include
both holes and sacked segments (equal to what FACK has) due to
complexity involved in determining the number sacked blocks
between highest_sack and the reordered segment. Thus it's will
be an over-estimate.
Implementation note:
tcp_clean_rtx_queue doesn't need a lost_cnt tweak because head
skb at that point cannot be SACKED_ACKED (nor would such
situation last for long enough to cause problems).
Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
85cc391c0e