Sure. I don't mind doing this test. I am currently working with Doug Leith 
to get to the bottom of this difference. So when we get to the PFLDnet, we 
should have some more findings on this. But I am up for this challenge.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lachlan Andrew" <redacted>
To: <redacted>
Cc: "Douglas Leith" <redacted>; <redacted>; 
[off-list ref]; [off-list ref]; "Injong Rhee" 
[off-list ref]; [off-list ref]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: [e2e] performance of BIC-TCP, High-Speed-TCP, H-TCP etc

Greetings all,

On 23/09/06, rhee@ncsu.edu [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Just i was pondering why we got different results and try to see if we 
can
come to some understanding on this different results we got. Who knows we
together might run into some fundamental research issues regarding
testing.

Since many interested parties will be around LA for PFLDnet, how about
getting together after that (Friday 9 Feb) to re-run some of the
disputed tests on one set of hardware, with everyone present to debate
the results?

You're all welcome to come to Caltech to do the testing.  We can
provide a few servers, dummynets and Gigabit switches.  Everyone is
welcome to bring their scripts, and any other hardware they need.

If there is interest, we could also have things like a round-table
discussion of the benefits of testing with different file-length
distributions (like long lived flows to understand what is happening
vs a range of flows to test suitability for deployment), and the
benefits of repeating other people's tests vs testing in as many
scenarios as possible.

Who is interested in coming?

Cheers,
Lachlan

-- 
Lachlan Andrew  Dept of Computer Science, Caltech
1200 E California Blvd, Mail Code 256-80, Pasadena CA 91125, USA
Phone: +1 (626) 395-8820    Fax: +1 (626) 568-3603