dbc95eb1   
   From: grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se   
      
   On Sat, 2009-12-12, karthikbalaguru wrote:   
   > On Dec 12, 6:01 pm, Jorgen Grahn  wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 2009-12-12, karthikbalaguru wrote:   
   >> > Hi,   
   >>   
   >> > What is the idea behind increasing the timeout   
   >> > by a factor of 2 whenever the timer expires to   
   >> > start a retransmission in TCP and Why specifically   
   >> > multiply by 2 to get "new_timeout = 2 * timeout"?   
   >>   
   >> Why not?   
   >>   
   >> Doesn't it seem fair that with more and more failed retransmission   
   >> attempts, this connection gets less and less attention by the stack,   
   >> compared to other, working connections?   
   >>   
   >> Backing off when there seems to be a problem is, I think, a generally   
   >> good idea.   
   >>   
   > Ok, but, why can't it be a multiple of 1.5 or 3 ?   
   > Any specific reasons behind the selection of '2' specifically ?   
   >   
   > Also, why is the multiplication factor static ?   
   >   
   > I think, it should be dependent on various   
   > other factors. Like, for example,   
   > I think, it can be initially multiplied by 1.5 and   
   > if it fails during that time, then the original can be multiplied   
   > by 2, and if it fails during that time also, then the original   
   > can be multiplied by 2.5 . Some other factors(if possible)   
   > can be taken into consideration before deciding on this   
   > and making the selection dynamic. Any thoughts ?   
      
   Someone else who knows more than me will have to answer that ... I   
   don't even know if a constant factor 2 is standardized, or if it's   
   just a common implementation.  It is certainly the simplest one.   
      
   /Jorgen   
      
   --   
     // Jorgen Grahn    O  o   .   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)