Re: setting bandwidth

     How do WebSockets deal with this problem? Do they even try to?

Gili

On 28/07/2013 1:10 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>
> This really isn't the place for lessons in congestion management on 
> the internet. Maybe you can start out by searching for "congestion 
> collapse". Get back to us when you can explain why TCP works like it does.
>
> On Jul 28, 2013 5:06 PM, "cowwoc" <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org 
> <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 28/07/2013 3:30 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>>     On 27 July 2013 09:40, cowwoc<cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>  <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>  wrote:
>>>     I expect an immediate sharp video experience.
>>     I suspect that no matter what we do, you will be disappointed.  The
>>     thing is, what you describe is likely to generate congestion and there
>>     is no way that a browser platform should permit an application to do
>>     that.
>
>         I don't understand the congestion argument, so please help me
>     understand.
>
>         What will happen if we start at 3MBit, versus slowly
>     increasing bandwidth usage up to 3Mbit in the following cases?
>
>      1. The pipe is a synchronous 2MBit line
>      2. The pipe is a synchronous 4MBit line
>
>         For case #1, if the initial fence is minBandwidth = 3MBit, I
>     expect the callback to get invoked right away and it either
>     aborting the application or reducing the video resolution and
>     minimum bandwidth. In the case of a gradual ramp-up, I expect the
>     same end-result (callback getting invoked) but it will take longer
>     to occur and will take place at the 2MBit mark.
>         For case #2, I expect both scenarios (immediate vs ramp-up) to
>     be identical.
>
>         Did I miss anything?
>
>     Thanks,
>     Gili
>