4 ms·
That's a variation of FEC and its good stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_error_correction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_error_correction we're
by patrickmcmanus 13y ago
That's a variation of FEC and its good stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_error_correction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_error_correction
we're seeing it come back into vogue in TCP and modern protocols. QUIC has a FEC component and TCP Tail Loss Probe (http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-tcpm-14.pdf http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-tcpm-14....) is a subtle variation on the theme too
the million dollar question around FEC is how correlated are different loss events which has a lot to do with how well it can work.
- twic 13y agoI guess it's a kind of FEC. To me, FEC usually means that (a) the error-correction information is smaller than the message it covers and (b) the error-correction information is included in the message it covers. The Header Error Control field in an ATM cell is the canonical example for me. But, yes, sending duplicates in another datagram does allow errors to be corrected without being reported to the sender, so it corrects errors in a forward direction, which i suppose makes it FEC. That Google tail loss stuff is nice, thanks for the link. It's cool that thirty years after RFC793, we're still making significant improvements to TCP.
- stephen_g 13y agoThat's just FEC with a code rate of 1