Re: [lwip-users] Re: lwip-users Digest, Vol 87, Issue 31

[Kieran Mansley]

On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 15:50 -0500, Chen wrote:
> 
> Both cases were created by pulling the ethernet cable on the PC to 
> demonstrate the retransmit mechanism, and Nagel is disabled in both
> cases.
> 
> *** THERE IS NOTHING WRONG IN LWIP'S APPROACH ***, but there is room 
> to improve: If the ack comes in slower than usual, the Non-lwip 
> approach will keep the flow going and have no impact on the throughput
> rate.
> 
> May I request such option in the future lwip?

I really don't like the NonAVR version.  What will cause it to start
retransmission?  It seems to have ignored the TCP retransmission timeout
and is just carrying on sending new data regardless.  I would be against
any change to make lwIP behave more like this.  I'm happy to see it
carry on sending data until the RTO fires, but after that we must assume
something is wrong and stop sending new data to retransmit old packets.

Kieran