Final answer:
TCP Reno and TCP Tahoe both handle reliable data transmission but vary in their congestion control mechanisms. TCP Tahoe reacts to all packet losses by restarting from slow start, while TCP Reno introduces fast recovery, which differentiates types of packet losses and adjusts the congestion window size without entering slow start, leading to potentially better throughput.
Step-by-step explanation:
TCP Reno and TCP Tahoe are both variants of the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) used to ensure reliable communication over the internet. The primary difference between them lies in their approach to congestion control and loss recovery. TCP Tahoe uses a congestion control mechanism called 'slow start', where it increases the window size exponentially until a packet loss is detected; upon detecting a loss, it performs a process called 'fast retransmit' and then re-enters slow start. It does not distinguish the type of packet loss but reacts to any packet loss by entering into the 'slow start' phase, which is quite conservative and can lead to lower throughput under certain network conditions.
On the other hand, TCP Reno introduces an additional mechanism known as 'fast recovery' on top of what Tahoe provides. Fast recovery allows the protocol to differentiate between the loss of a packet due to congestion and other types of losses. Upon detecting multiple duplicate Acknowledgments (ACKs), Reno infers a packet having been dropped, performs a 'fast retransmit', and rather than entering slow start, it halves the congestion window and enters the 'fast recovery' phase, where it linearly increases the window size. This allows TCP Reno to recover from losses without reducing its transmission rate as drastically as TCP Tahoe does.
In summary, the response of TCP Reno to packet loss is more refined, allowing for generally better throughput and less drastic changes to the congestion window size compared to TCP Tahoe.