From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
To: "<davehart_gmail_exchange_tee@davehart.net>"
<davehart_gmail_exchange_tee@davehart.net>
Cc: "<bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>" <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
Dauran raza <dauran.raza@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Bufferbloat research: Help required
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 18:56:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15815375-7E44-42DE-AE49-6630A053B88B@netflix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMbSiYDn=YfOKMQU5ct9wQkD-ATx606Pr9DZJGJBNJHiqqdKCw@mail.gmail.com>
It's also interesting to note that cellular wireless systems have been designed with a primary objective of reducing packet loss, at the expense of delay and especially delay variability introduced by link layer ARQ and other schemes. This approach maximizes the throughput of a single long-lived TCP connection, which is not an especially common traffic pattern.
Furthermore, the throughput of a cellular wireless radio channel varies by orders of magnitude on fairly rapidly (channel conditions are reassessed hundreds of times per second): what was a reasonable sized buffer for the throughput at one moment becomes a bloated one a fraction of a second later.
Best,
Mark Watson
On Nov 28, 2012, at 8:39 AM, Dave Hart wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Dauran raza <dauran.raza@gmail.com> wrote:
>> My name is Dauran Raza and i am currently doing Masters in Computer Science
>> from University Paderborn. Currently i am researching on the Problem of
>> Bufferbloat for a course under Prof Holger Karl. I have been regularly
>> reading you articles on your websites about this problem and it has been
>> really helpfull. I have a problem which is not answered so far through any
>> research paper. I wanted to know is there any difference in Wired and
>> Wireless networks caused by this problem and can you guide me with any good
>> paper or article to read on.
>
> I wish you well in your graduate studies, and I commend Prof. Holger
> Karl for his interest in the topic. I am, however, cautious that I
> don't want to do your research for you.
>
> Briefly, as you would hopefully anticipate, wireless presents more
> challenges to addressing bufferbloat than wired. For example, the
> jitter (delay variability) is much worse than wired, and 802.11n
> requires aggregation of multiple packets into one transmission to
> achieve its higher throughputs vs. 802.11g, which further increases
> jitter and complicates AQM.
>
> Even ignoring wireless, gigabit wired is more challenging than 100
> Mbit, again because techniques used to maximize peak throughput (such
> as deeper transmit buffers and receive interrupt coalescing) tend to
> make bufferbloat more of a challenge.
>
> There's a theme here -- those developing network advancements have
> tended to focus on maximizing achievable throughput without enough
> consideration of the negative effects on bufferbloat, often (at least
> historically) with no understanding of bufferbloat at all.
>
> I pray I have not said too much already, and if I have, please convey
> my apologies to Prof. Karl.
>
> I suggest digging into the mailing list archives:
>
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo
>
> I'd start with the bloat and bloat-devel lists, then the Codel-related
> lists, and possibly other -devel and -commit lists. Also, if you make
> yourself useful in one or more bufferbloat.net projects, you will gain
> firsthand knowledge of the issues as well as personal relationships
> with people well-versed in the issues.
>
> Thanks for your interest,
> Dave Hart
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-30 18:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAPoy_SWZESfxdWv-bp1cT+PrR6su3=S7w1cQOTwgmbA2JvG_tw@mail.gmail.com>
2012-11-25 15:21 ` Dauran raza
2012-11-28 16:39 ` Dave Hart
2012-11-30 18:56 ` Mark Watson [this message]
2012-11-30 21:17 ` Simon Barber
2012-12-01 20:53 ` Michael Richardson
2012-12-01 21:47 ` Simon Barber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=15815375-7E44-42DE-AE49-6630A053B88B@netflix.com \
--to=watsonm@netflix.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=dauran.raza@gmail.com \
--cc=davehart_gmail_exchange_tee@davehart.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox