some comments

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/mptcp-cryp...
File src/internet/model/mptcp-crypto.cc (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/mptcp-cryp...
src/internet/model/mptcp-crypto.cc:61: /*
remove

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-header.h
File src/internet/model/tcp-header.h (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-header...
src/internet/model/tcp-header.h:375: for
(TcpHeader::TcpOptionList::const_iterator it = l.begin (); it != l.end (); ++it)
this is not mandatory but now that ns3 supports c++11, you may be able to update
the code to c++11 standards with for(auto it. ...)

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-header...
src/internet/model/tcp-header.h:378: //                    << " with " <<
T::GetTypeId().GetName()
remove comments !

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-l4-pro...
File src/internet/model/tcp-l4-protocol.cc (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-l4-pro...
src/internet/model/tcp-l4-protocol.cc:808: )
this function is just for debug. Either remove it or call it only within #ifdef
DEBUG #endif

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-option.h
File src/internet/model/tcp-option.h (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/diff/1/src/internet/model/tcp-option...
src/internet/model/tcp-option.h:64: MPTCP = 30,   //! Multipath TCP options
share the same Kind
align comment

At a high level, I think the current patch misses the following: 

1. Some examples to show how to simulate the code
2. Unit tests
3. Documentation 

Could you please add them?

On 2018/10/27 08:51:46, trucanh524 wrote:
> At a high level, I think the current patch misses the following: 
> 
> 1. Some examples to show how to simulate the code
> 2. Unit tests
> 3. Documentation 
> 
> Could you please add them?

Hi, truncanh524

Thanks for reviewing my patch. I actually have example scripts but didn't yet
created tests and documentation. I will try to create them and upload them here.

Regards,

On 2018/10/27 13:32:34, kashif nadeem wrote:
> On 2018/10/27 08:51:46, trucanh524 wrote:
> > At a high level, I think the current patch misses the following: 
> > 
> > 1. Some examples to show how to simulate the code
> > 2. Unit tests
> > 3. Documentation 
> > 
> > Could you please add them?
> 
> Hi, truncanh524
> 
> Thanks for reviewing my patch. I actually have example scripts 

Do you want to update the patch with your example scripts first so that I could
run and review the code in more details given that I have some time this week? 

> but didn't yet
> created tests and documentation. I will try to create them and upload them
here.

I suggest the documentation also includes all the features that you have
implemented, features that are still missing (in comparison with the RFC), and
the limitations (if any)of the code.  How many subflows the current patch can
create? 

Best, 

Anh 
> 
> Regards,

On 2018/10/27 14:14:16, trucanh524 wrote:
> On 2018/10/27 13:32:34, kashif nadeem wrote:
> > On 2018/10/27 08:51:46, trucanh524 wrote:
> > > At a high level, I think the current patch misses the following: 
> > > 
> > > 1. Some examples to show how to simulate the code
> > > 2. Unit tests
> > > 3. Documentation 
> > > 
> > > Could you please add them?
> > 
> > Hi, truncanh524
> > 
> > Thanks for reviewing my patch. I actually have example scripts 
> 
> Do you want to update the patch with your example scripts first so that I
could
> run and review the code in more details given that I have some time this week?

> 
> > but didn't yet
> > created tests and documentation. I will try to create them and upload them
> here.
> 
> I suggest the documentation also includes all the features that you have
> implemented, features that are still missing (in comparison with the RFC), and
> the limitations (if any)of the code.  How many subflows the current patch can
> create? 
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Anh 
> > 
> > Regards,

Hi You can have example script from below link. I posted it in google groups
because some people requested me for it. My code generates any number of flows.
Normally 8 flows are recommended in literature per MPTCP connection. I will
consider your advice while preparing documentation.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ns-3-reviews/MPTCP$20patch$20is$20...

I don't see the example after clicking on the link.

Best,

Anh


On Saturday, October 27, 2018, <kshfnadeem@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2018/10/27 14:14:16, trucanh524 wrote:
>
>> On 2018/10/27 13:32:34, kashif nadeem wrote:
>> > On 2018/10/27 08:51:46, trucanh524 wrote:
>> > > At a high level, I think the current patch misses the following:
>> > >
>> > > 1. Some examples to show how to simulate the code
>> > > 2. Unit tests
>> > > 3. Documentation
>> > >
>> > > Could you please add them?
>> >
>> > Hi, truncanh524
>> >
>> > Thanks for reviewing my patch. I actually have example scripts
>>
>
> Do you want to update the patch with your example scripts first so
>>
> that I could
>
>> run and review the code in more details given that I have some time
>>
> this week?
>
> > but didn't yet
>> > created tests and documentation. I will try to create them and
>>
> upload them
>
>> here.
>>
>
> I suggest the documentation also includes all the features that you
>>
> have
>
>> implemented, features that are still missing (in comparison with the
>>
> RFC), and
>
>> the limitations (if any)of the code.  How many subflows the current
>>
> patch can
>
>> create?
>>
>
> Best,
>>
>
> Anh
>> >
>> > Regards,
>>
>
> Hi You can have example script from below link. I posted it in google
> groups because some people requested me for it. My code generates any
> number of flows. Normally 8 flows are recommended in literature per
> MPTCP connection. I will consider your advice while preparing
> documentation.
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ns-3-reviews/MPTC
> P$20patch$20is$20on$20codereview$20for$20Review$20process%
> 7Csort:date/ns-3-reviews/wtgm2E5yIU8/emHDjv9OBAAJ
>
> https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Truc Anh N. Nguyen*
annguyen@ittc.ku.edu      http://www.ittc.ku.edu/~annguyen
<http://www.ittc.ku.edu/~annguyen>
Information & Telecommunication Technology Center
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA

Hi,

That's a huge work. It is impossible to review it in one time, and from the
little I have seen, you did not follow any of the TCP latest trend
(modularization and C++11 above all).

Let me put in another way: I hate inheritance, it is a pain in the ass to
maintain. If you want it to be merged, you have to take the maintenance of the
TCP in its entirely. Or, let's put a set of small patches that can be applied
incrementally so we can try to fix things.

On 2018/12/06 18:22:48, n.p wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> That's a huge work. It is impossible to review it in one time, and from the
> little I have seen, you did not follow any of the TCP latest trend
> (modularization and C++11 above all).
> 
> Let me put in another way: I hate inheritance, it is a pain in the ass to
> maintain. If you want it to be merged, you have to take the maintenance of the
> TCP in its entirely. Or, let's put a set of small patches that can be applied
> incrementally so we can try to fix things.

Hi Natale,

Thanks for your reviews. You are right it's a huge work and I spent lot of time
on this model. May be, I've missed some of TCP latest trends. If you give me
directions and point out things in my code which you think should be modified
according to latest TCP trends, I will work on it and will revise this code.

I guess it's a big responsibility to maintain TCP along with MPTCP and I'm not
sure if I'm ready for this. You also mentioned we can work with small patches to
fix the things. I will work on it and will collaborate with development team to
merge this model.

Hi,

I have downloaded the patch and compiled MPTCP successfully in ns-3.28. MPTCP
works well when I run the example "mptcp-example.cc" but when I try to test
MPTCP in a spine-leaf topology,  the simulation ends with:
...
==== Dumping list of mappings ====
==== End of dump ====

msg="Could not find mapping associated to ssn",
file=../src/internet/model/mptcp-subflow.cc, line=289
terminate called without an active exception

Sorry I don't spend much time to check the code. I wonder what are the possible
reasons for this failure?

Thank you so much.

Best,
Francis

Hi,

I guess the problem is with your script and topology. MPTCP connection/flow
isn’t getting mapping as expected. It may be the problem with TCP Sequence
Numbers. You need to figure it out by debugging.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: francisleely@gmail.com
Sent: 19 December 2018 19:05
To: kshfnadeem@gmail.com; vivelepourriel@gmail.com; trucanh524@gmail.com;
annguyen@ittc.ku.edu; natale.patriciello@gmail.com
Cc: ns-3-reviews@googlegroups.com; reply@codereview-hr.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: ns-3 mptcp (issue 369810043 by kshfnadeem@gmail.com)

Hi,

I have downloaded the patch and compiled MPTCP successfully in ns-3.28.
MPTCP works well when I run the example "mptcp-example.cc" but when I
try to test MPTCP in a spine-leaf topology,  the simulation ends with:
...
==== Dumping list of mappings ====
==== End of dump ====

msg="Could not find mapping associated to ssn",
file=../src/internet/model/mptcp-subflow.cc, line=289
terminate called without an active exception

Sorry I don't spend much time to check the code. I wonder what are the
possible reasons for this failure?

Thank you so much.

Best,
Francis


https://codereview.appspot.com/369810043/

Hi  kashif:
   These days, I have to compare the performance of the tcp and mptcp, I find
that when several onoffapplications send flows to a same sink application, mptcp
have a bug, when I using TCP, the sink application can  receive all the bytes,
but, when  I using mptcp, the sink application just receive only one
onoffapplication's packets, whenever other applications start or stop, the sink
application just recieve the earliest start onoffapplication. I feel happy to
discuss the problems with you, thank you.
Best,
Zhang Ruiqing

Hi  kashif:
   These days, I have to compare the performance of the tcp and mptcp, I find
that when several onoffapplications send flows to a same sink application, mptcp
have a bug, when I using TCP, the sink application can  receive all the bytes,
but, when  I using mptcp, the sink application just receive only one
onoffapplication's packets, whenever other applications start or stop, the sink
application just recieve the earliest start onoffapplication. I feel happy to
discuss the problems with you, thank you.
Best,
Zhang Ruiqing

On 2019/01/06 01:52:34, rqzhangxd wrote:
> Hi  kashif:
>    These days, I have to compare the performance of the tcp and mptcp, I find
> that when several onoffapplications send flows to a same sink application,
mptcp
> have a bug, when I using TCP, the sink application can  receive all the bytes,
> but, when  I using mptcp, the sink application just receive only one
> onoffapplication's packets, whenever other applications start or stop, the
sink
> application just recieve the earliest start onoffapplication. I feel happy to
> discuss the problems with you, thank you.
> Best,
> Zhang Ruiqing

Hello, 
I am writing a topology of mptcp-wifi recently, but this problem also appears, I
would like to ask you how to solve this problem.

On 2019/01/06 01:52:34, rqzhangxd wrote:
> Hi  kashif:
>    These days, I have to compare the performance of the tcp and mptcp, I find
> that when several onoffapplications send flows to a same sink application,
mptcp
> have a bug, when I using TCP, the sink application can  receive all the bytes,
> but, when  I using mptcp, the sink application just receive only one
> onoffapplication's packets, whenever other applications start or stop, the
sink
> application just recieve the earliest start onoffapplication. I feel happy to
> discuss the problems with you, thank you.
> Best,
> Zhang Ruiqing

Hello, 
I am writing a topology of mptcp-wifi recently, but this problem also appears, I
would like to ask you how to solve this problem.

On 2018/12/19 14:05:11, Francis Lee wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have downloaded the patch and compiled MPTCP successfully in ns-3.28. MPTCP
> works well when I run the example "mptcp-example.cc" but when I try to test
> MPTCP in a spine-leaf topology,  the simulation ends with:
> ...
> ==== Dumping list of mappings ====
> ==== End of dump ====
> 
> msg="Could not find mapping associated to ssn",
> file=../src/internet/model/mptcp-subflow.cc, line=289
> terminate called without an active exception
> 
> Sorry I don't spend much time to check the code. I wonder what are the
possible
> reasons for this failure?
> 
> Thank you so much.
> 
> Best,
> Francis

Hi

I encounter the same issue. Do you have any idea how this could be solved?

Thanks.

On 2020/03/22 16:20:03, ytxing96 wrote:
> On 2018/12/19 14:05:11, Francis Lee wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have downloaded the patch and compiled MPTCP successfully in ns-3.28.
MPTCP
> > works well when I run the example "mptcp-example.cc" but when I try to test
> > MPTCP in a spine-leaf topology,  the simulation ends with:
> > ...
> > ==== Dumping list of mappings ====
> > ==== End of dump ====
> > 
> > msg="Could not find mapping associated to ssn",
> > file=../src/internet/model/mptcp-subflow.cc, line=289
> > terminate called without an active exception
> > 
> > Sorry I don't spend much time to check the code. I wonder what are the
> possible
> > reasons for this failure?
> > 
> > Thank you so much.
> > 
> > Best,
> > Francis
> 
> Hi
> 
> I encounter the same issue. Do you have any idea how this could be solved?
> 
> Thanks.

Hello Francis,
I am  also facing same issue, when I tried to run mptcp-example.cc, the
simulation ends with:
> ...
> > ==== Dumping list of mappings ====
> > ==== End of dump ====
are you have solution for same. If yes, kindly help me remove this error.
With Best Regard
L. P Verma