RFC 4653: Improving the Robustness of TCP to Non-Congestion Events
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document specifies Non-Congestion Robustness (NCR) for TCP. In the absence of explicit congestion notification from the network, TCP uses loss as an indication of congestion. One of the ways TCP detects loss is using the arrival of three duplicate acknowledgments. However, this heuristic is not always correct, notably in the case when network paths reorder segments (for whatever reason), resulting in degraded performance. TCP-NCR is designed to mitigate this degraded performance by increasing the number of duplicate acknowledgments required to trigger loss recovery, based on the current state of the connection, in an effort to better disambiguate true segment loss from segment reordering. This document specifies the changes to TCP, as well as the costs and benefits of these modifications. This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4653
- Published
- August 2006
- Authors
- S. Bhandarkar; A. L. N. Reddy; M. Allman; E. Blanton
- Status
- EXPERIMENTAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- wit
- Pages
- 18
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 4898TCP Extended Statistics MIBCurrent
May 2007
- RFC 4138Forward RTO-Recovery (F-RTO): An Algorithm for Detecting Spurious Retransmission Timeouts with TCP and the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)Updated
August 2005
- RFC 5482TCP User Timeout OptionCurrent
March 2009
- RFC 3782The NewReno Modification to TCP's Fast Recovery AlgorithmObsoleted
April 2004
- RFC 3742Limited Slow-Start for TCP with Large Congestion WindowsCurrent
March 2004
- RFC 3649HighSpeed TCP for Large Congestion WindowsCurrent
December 2003
- RFC 5682Forward RTO-Recovery (F-RTO): An Algorithm for Detecting Spurious Retransmission Timeouts with TCPCurrent
September 2009
- RFC 3540Robust Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Signaling with NoncesCurrent
June 2003
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?