Re: [patch 3/3] tcp: remove experimental variants from default list

From: Stephen Hemminger <redacted>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:37:13 -0800

My patches weren't reactionary. Going to pure old Reno is reactionary.
It was more looking at the state of the code on the flight back
and cleaning house. Others were/are reactionary. 

Ok.

The only patch I have a real problem with is the DEFAULT_*
removals, the choices are frankly arbitrary.

Vegas is buggy, that's nice, why don't we simply fix the
bugs in our implementation?

Westwood is very conservative, frankly, and I therefore see
no reason it cannot be offered as a default either.

HTCP doesn't do anything earth shattering either.

I think the whole suite of algorithms in that list are
reasonable.

And even re-reading your patch, you're messing with the
DEFAULT_* setting for the case where the user selected
TCP_CONG_ADVANCED.

I think TCP_CONG_ADVANCED implies an intention by the user,
and if he wants to choose one of those listed as a default
why should we stop them?

The distributions take the default we recommend, and that's
all that matters for wide deployment.

I push the problem back in their court: "Why do you not have a process
that causes consensus?" IETF has done nothing to create any incentive
for long term cooperation.

Yep, this is a good point.

Do I need to dig out the "Why Reno sucks" graphs?

Hehe :-)