RFC 8087: The Benefits of Using Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The goal of this document is to describe the potential benefits of applications using a transport that enables Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN). The document outlines the principal gains in terms of increased throughput, reduced delay, and other benefits when ECN is used over a network path that includes equipment that supports Congestion Experienced (CE) marking. It also discusses challenges for successful deployment of ECN. It does not propose new algorithms to use ECN nor does it describe the details of implementation of ECN in endpoint devices (Internet hosts), routers, or other network devices.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8087
- Published
- March 2017
- Authors
- G. Fairhurst; M. Welzl
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- tsv
- Pages
- 19
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 8257Data Center TCP (DCTCP): TCP Congestion Control for Data CentersCurrent
October 2017
- RFC 7605Recommendations on Using Assigned Transport Port NumbersCurrent
August 2015
- RFC 9330Low Latency, Low Loss, and Scalable Throughput (L4S) Internet Service: ArchitectureCurrent
January 2023
- RFC 9331The Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Protocol for Low Latency, Low Loss, and Scalable Throughput (L4S)Current
January 2023
- RFC 9332Dual-Queue Coupled Active Queue Management (AQM) for Low Latency, Low Loss, and Scalable Throughput (L4S)Current
January 2023
- RFC 6633Deprecation of ICMP Source Quench MessagesCurrent
May 2012
- RFC 3540Robust Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Signaling with NoncesCurrent
June 2003
- RFC 3257Stream Control Transmission Protocol Applicability StatementCurrent
April 2002
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?