<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Network Protocol on Mi&amp;Bee Blog</title><link>/en/tags/network-protocol/</link><description>Recent content in Network Protocol on Mi&amp;Bee Blog</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><managingEditor>蓝宝石的傻话</managingEditor><lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="/en/tags/network-protocol/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>TCP Congestion Control Evolution: From Reno to BBR</title><link>/en/posts/network/tcp-congestion-control-evolution/</link><pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>/en/posts/network/tcp-congestion-control-evolution/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;The previous articles in this series focused on the architecture and implementation of P2P networks, but the performance bottleneck of P2P applications often lies not in the protocol layer itself, but in the underlying transport protocol — TCP congestion control. A single BitTorrent node may maintain hundreds of concurrent TCP connections, each independently performing congestion control. Choosing the wrong congestion control algorithm can severely degrade bandwidth utilization, especially on high-latency links or links with random packet loss. Understanding the evolution of congestion control not only helps P2P developers optimize transport performance but is also essential for gaining a deep understanding of how the internet transport layer operates.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>