From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@deepplum.com>
To: stephen@networkplumber.org
Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Two questions re high speed congestion management anddatagram protocols
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 23:41:59 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1687837319.447910185@mobile.rackspace.com> (raw)
Sorry for top posting, but ... Bigger question:
Why would DCCP be deprecated by Linux kernel?
Who makes that decision? Who argues against it?
It's a pretty good approach to properly congestion controlling many non-TCP communications protocols that might be implemented on UDP and lack good congestion control otherwise.
E.g. QUIC or RTP (for non CBR traffic) or various RPC-style protocols. Larry Peterson recently wrote a piece asking why RPC wasn't well supported in distributed computing even after almost 50 years. Lack of Conception Control that works is a big issue. QUIC ain't it. QUiC is a HTTP replacement for REST protocol sementics.
So why discard a good thing that works?
-----Original Message-----
From: "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Sent: Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 2:51 pm
To: "David P. Reed via Bloat" <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Cc: "David P. Reed via Bloat" <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>, "Cake List" <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Two questions re high speed congestion management anddatagram protocols
On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 14:41:52 -0400 (EDT)
"David P. Reed via Bloat" wrote:
> I also was looking back to DCCP as a useful way to get a UDP that handled congestion without engaging the higher layers, and preserving the other flexibility of UDP.
DCCP never got widely used, and Linux is on the path of deprecating it.
next reply other threads:[~2023-06-27 3:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-27 3:41 David P. Reed [this message]
2023-06-27 14:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
2023-06-28 9:43 ` Erik Auerswald
2023-06-27 19:47 ` David Lang
2023-06-27 22:49 ` Stephen Hemminger
2023-06-28 2:03 ` [Bloat] [Cake] " Dave Taht
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=1687837319.447910185@mobile.rackspace.com \
--to=dpreed@deepplum.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/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