From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jerryj@duckware.com>
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "mout.perfora.net", Issuer "Thawte SSL CA" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5855321F42B
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 07:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from J4 (c-68-50-226-187.hsd1.md.comcast.net [68.50.226.187])
	by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mreueus003) with ESMTP (Nemesis)
	id 0M0S2F-1YHgyq2J6T-00uYk9; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 16:37:09 +0200
From: "Jerry Jongerius" <jerryj@duckware.com>
To: "'David Lang'" <david@lang.hm>
References: <000001cfbefe$69194c70$3b4be550$@duckware.com>
	<D542A271-BFFF-4494-8EE9-CBC9BFEB09EE@gmx.de>
	<D020C902.3BF0A%g.white@cablelabs.com>
	<000901cfc2c2$c21ae460$4650ad20$@duckware.com>
	<4A89264B-36C5-4D1F-9E5E-33F2B42C364E@gmail.com>
	<002201cfc2e4$565c1100$03143300$@duckware.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1408281857550.23856@nftneq.ynat.uz>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1408281857550.23856@nftneq.ynat.uz>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:37:10 -0400
Message-ID: <002a01cfc396$ba5c8510$2f158f30$@duckware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQFFVy+FAO2HJAXNGbNNrLY/R/b/6gGg5QYjATtzUJsCM/8plgJDZN5dAwhNtMwCHMBZ5pyYtKPw
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:RKTRckMHAbMubrem0a9TqvM9rG52porcwrdBnuSQ8Nz
	7vyI6EdEOL35fEBRiSpR/0KNj5tzNzPulTz8SKTycpR78SSLe6
	bftbHUwWeh7U67Gvjp2KwBgn0jEiTUiAutV/lpcN8xzcMExlz5
	wz09GLqM/EBZ0RttjJpjDZ0eaBKAVi1piaZ7HgjbtkHgdjLIvI
	4MrQcmfNZkbfefy9ZJjdaGfboNKpYIYgRJ8OIdMr73Q4jxVLgZ
	vvm1uIcXNRjB5/bpCyUx6Rq4v2g9GnLMd1wqMMMT6LpT5vhJva
	truJ6X+k5iLRXVqtE9RySEa0nCeGb3ndNrClnT/Qtd6S224I24
	SCCr+Szi6HBYIIM9+mz11HSBxGEU8L8BakowDp0C7
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] The Dark Problem with AQM in the Internet?
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 14:37:11 -0000

> did you check to see if packets were re-sent even if they weren't lost? on
of
> the side effects of excessive buffering is that it's possible for a packet
to
> be held in the buffer long enough that the sender thinks that it's been
> lost and retransmits it, so the packet is effectivly 'lost' even if it
actually
> arrives at it's destination.

Yes.  A duplicate packet for the missing packet is not seen.

The receiver 'misses' a packet; starts sending out tons of dup acks (for all
packets in flight and queued up due to bufferbloat), and then way later, the
packet does come in (after the RTT caused by bufferbloat; indicating it is
the 'resent' packet).