Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,955

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Congestion avoidance and control

Jacobson, V.·1988·ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review

Abstract

In October of '86, the Internet had the first of what became a series of 'congestion collapses'. During this period, the data throughput from LBL to UC Berkeley (sites separated by 400 yards and three IMP hops) dropped from 32 Kbps to 40 bps. Mike Karels 1 and I were fascinated by this sudden factor-of-thousand drop in bandwidth and embarked on an investigation of why things had gotten so bad. We wondered, in particular, if the 4.3BSD (Berkeley UNIX) TCP was mis-behaving or if it could be tuned to work better under abysmal network conditions. The answer to both of these questions was “yes”. Since that time, we have put seven new algorithms into the 4BSD TCP: round-trip-time variance estimation exponential retransmit timer backoff slow-start more aggressive receiver ack policy dynamic window sizing on congestion Karn's clamped retransmit backoff fast retransmit Our measurements and the reports of beta testers suggest that the final product is fairly good at dealing with congested conditions on the Internet. This paper is a brief description of ( i ) - ( v ) and the rationale behind them. ( vi ) is an algorithm recently developed by Phil Karn of Bell Communications Research, described in [KP87]. ( viii ) is described in a soon-to-be-published RFC. Algorithms ( i ) - ( v ) spring from one observation: The flow on a TCP connection (or ISO TP-4 or Xerox NS SPP connection) should obey a 'conservation of packets' principle. And, if this principle were obeyed, congestion collapse would become the exception rather than the rule. Thus congestion control involves finding places that violate conservation and fixing them. By 'conservation of packets' I mean that for a connection 'in equilibrium', i.e., running stably with a full window of data in transit, the packet flow is what a physicist would call 'conservative': A new packet isn't put into the network until an old packet leaves. The physics of flow predicts that systems with this property should be robust in the face of congestion. Observation of the Internet suggests that it was not particularly robust. Why the discrepancy? There are only three ways for packet conservation to fail: The connection doesn't get to equilibrium, or A sender injects a new packet before an old packet has exited, or The equilibrium can't be reached because of resource limits along the path. In the following sections, we treat each of these in turn.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/52325.52356

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,955

Metadata

Authors
Jacobson, V.
Venue
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
Published
1988-08
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
314-329
ISSN
0146-4833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4248409180
Cited by
1,955
References
0
FWCI
7.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Congestion avoidance and control. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/52325.52356
The paper
Jacobson, V. (1988). Congestion avoidance and control. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. https://doi.org/10.1145/52325.52356

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.