Differences between TCP and Go Back N

I read Computer Networking from Kurose and read in the TCP chapter about the differences between TCP and Go Back N. I found something that I did not quite understand. The book talks about some of the differences between the two protocols:

"many implementations of TCP buffers, correctly received, but not ordered segments, and not discarded.

suppose that segs 1, 2, ... N, are received correctly in order, ACK (n), n <N, is lost, and the remaining N-1s are won before the sender until their respective timeouts TCP relays most of seg, t .e. Seg n, not pkts, n, n + 1, ..., N TCP don’t even retransmit seg n if ACK (n + 1) arrived before timeout for seg n "

I understand the buffering of segments out of order, but I don’t understand the other behavior, and I think this is because I do not fully understand Go Back N. Following this example, if ACK (n + t) arrives before N timeout returns, the protocol will continue as if seg n was actually received, which is due to cumulative ACKS ... therefore, Back Back N will not retransmit this segment ... or am I missing something?

+5
source share
5 answers

I searched for the answer to this question, and, finding it, I thought that although this is old, it might help someone, so I copied a fragment from Kurose-Ross Computer Networking - a top-down approach:

TCP GBN SR? , TCP , . , TCP , (SendBase) , (NextSeqNum). TCP GBN. TCP Go-Back-N. TCP , [Stevens 1994]. , , 1, 2,.,, N, . n < N , N - 1 -. GBN n, n + 1, n + 2, ,, N. TCP, , , . , TCP n, n + 1, n.

: TCP GBN, SR.

+10

ACK(n) n. , ACK(n+1) , n+1, n.

0

, ACK (n) , . , ACK (n + x) , n + x .

0

, , :

, , 1, 2,.,, N, . , n < N , N-1 -. GBN n, n + 1, n + 2,.,, N. TCP, , , n. , TCP n, n + 1 n.

, , ACK n+1 , , n - . , - n GBN ACK(n+1) ACK(n+2)... n.

TCP n .

P.S. . , , , -.

0

. , GBN SR:

N (GBN):

(SR): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs8tR8A9jm8

GBN SR, ACK , .

TCP, ACK , . ACK, , . , ACK. .

( ), TCP , GBN SR, 2 ACK.

, . TCP , . TCP , GBN SR

0
source

All Articles