[Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Livingood, Jason]

 FYI that I will be presenting a lightning talk at the IRTF MAPRG meeting today at 17:30 ET (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg). The talk links to a just-published paper at https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968 (click PDF link in upper right of page) that will likely be of interest to these two lists.

High-level: turning on AQM in the cable modem (upstream queue) took working latency from around 250 ms to between 15-30 ms, which is actually kind of cool. ;-) AQM is turned on in all of our CMTSes (downstream queue) and in DOCSIS 3.1 modems (upstream queue).

Have a nice weekend,
Jason

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Simon Barber]

Awesome to hear that you are turning this on both upstream and downstream. Do you know if the wifi stacks in your home routers also have AQM?

Simon


> On Jul 30, 2021, at 10:28 PM, Livingood, Jason via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> 
> FYI that I will be presenting a lightning talk at the IRTF MAPRG meeting today at 17:30 ET (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg). The talk links to a just-published paper at https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968 (click PDF link in upper right of page) that will likely be of interest to these two lists.
> 
> High-level: turning on AQM in the cable modem (upstream queue) took working latency from around 250 ms to between 15-30 ms, which is actually kind of cool. ;-) AQM is turned on in all of our CMTSes (downstream queue) and in DOCSIS 3.1 modems (upstream queue).
> 
> Have a nice weekend,
> Jason
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Aaron Wood]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1543 bytes --]

If we see that AQM appears to be not functioning as expected for upstream
connections on DOCSIS3.1, what's the right avenue for getting that
resolved?  (and does that only apply to the Comcast-owned, vs.
customer-owned, modems?)

On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 10:50 AM Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net> wrote:

> Awesome to hear that you are turning this on both upstream and downstream.
> Do you know if the wifi stacks in your home routers also have AQM?
>
> Simon
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 2021, at 10:28 PM, Livingood, Jason via Bloat <
> bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >
> > FYI that I will be presenting a lightning talk at the IRTF MAPRG meeting
> today at 17:30 ET (
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg). The
> talk links to a just-published paper at https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968
> (click PDF link in upper right of page) that will likely be of interest to
> these two lists.
> >
> > High-level: turning on AQM in the cable modem (upstream queue) took
> working latency from around 250 ms to between 15-30 ms, which is actually
> kind of cool. ;-) AQM is turned on in all of our CMTSes (downstream queue)
> and in DOCSIS 3.1 modems (upstream queue).
> >
> > Have a nice weekend,
> > Jason
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bloat mailing list
> > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2542 bytes --]

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Neal Cardwell]

On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 3:27 PM Aaron Wood <woody77@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we see that AQM appears to be not functioning as expected
>  for upstream connections on DOCSIS3.1, what's the right avenue
> for getting that resolved?  (and does that only apply to the
> Comcast-owned, vs. customer-owned, modems?)

FWIW, from the paper it sounds like not all Comcast cable modems
had/have PIE, which enabled the A/B experiment:

"10. Latency Measurement Results
As explained earlier, for two variants of XB6 cable modem gateway,
upstream DOCSIS-PIE AQM was enabled on the CGM4140COM (experiment)
variant but was not available on the TG3482G (control) variant during
the measurement period. The TG3482G variant used a buffer control
configuration that predated AQM in DOCSIS."

neal

>
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 10:50 AM Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net> wrote:
>>
>> Awesome to hear that you are turning this on both upstream and downstream. Do you know if the wifi stacks in your home routers also have AQM?
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 30, 2021, at 10:28 PM, Livingood, Jason via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > FYI that I will be presenting a lightning talk at the IRTF MAPRG meeting today at 17:30 ET (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg). The talk links to a just-published paper at https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968 (click PDF link in upper right of page) that will likely be of interest to these two lists.
>> >
>> > High-level: turning on AQM in the cable modem (upstream queue) took working latency from around 250 ms to between 15-30 ms, which is actually kind of cool. ;-) AQM is turned on in all of our CMTSes (downstream queue) and in DOCSIS 3.1 modems (upstream queue).
>> >
>> > Have a nice weekend,
>> > Jason
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bloat mailing list
>> > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat mailing list
>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Michael Richardson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 993 bytes --]


Neal Cardwell via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
    > On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 3:27 PM Aaron Wood <woody77@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> If we see that AQM appears to be not functioning as expected
    >> for upstream connections on DOCSIS3.1, what's the right avenue
    >> for getting that resolved?  (and does that only apply to the
    >> Comcast-owned, vs. customer-owned, modems?)

    > FWIW, from the paper it sounds like not all Comcast cable modems
    > had/have PIE, which enabled the A/B experiment:

This does bring up an interesting discovery question:

the presences of AQM (whether PIE or FQ_CODEL), and what the settings might
be (for some things need to be tuned), would be something that might be
interested to emit via LLDP.
And/or at a /.well-known URL (accessible via IPv6-LL only).

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide





[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Kenneth Porter]

On 7/31/2021 3:55 PM, Neal Cardwell via Bloat wrote:
> FWIW, from the paper it sounds like not all Comcast cable modems
> had/have PIE, which enabled the A/B experiment:
>
> "10. Latency Measurement Results
> As explained earlier, for two variants of XB6 cable modem gateway,
> upstream DOCSIS-PIE AQM was enabled on the CGM4140COM (experiment)
> variant but was not available on the TG3482G (control) variant during
> the measurement period. The TG3482G variant used a buffer control
> configuration that predated AQM in DOCSIS."

For Comcast:

Mine is a TG1682G, which I'm betting lacks PIE. So how do we get an upgrade?

It's running in bridge mode so I can run my own DHCP server and override 
the default Comcast DNS servers, allowing me to use local names in my 
network. I run my own OpenWRT router behind it to do that. I'd love to 
eliminate the extra hop so how about giving us more control over the 
integrated DHCP(6) server? Let me override the options, both defaults 
and in fixed MAC-based assignments.

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Livingood, Jason]

On 8/1/21, 16:13, "Bloat on behalf of Kenneth Porter" <bloat-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net on behalf of shiva@sewingwitch.com> wrote:

> Mine is a TG1682G, which I'm betting lacks PIE. So how do we get an upgrade?

The "XB3" definitely lacks it - as it's DOCSIS 3.0-based. You may be eligible for a replacement, depending on your speed tier. Take a look at https://customer.xfinity.com/#/devices and see what that says. If that does not have anything that let's you replace it then send me an email 1:1 and I’ll assist. Optimally you'll want an XB7 but an XB6 would also work fine based on your config. (and I wish it could do more of what you need on other areas)

JL

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Kenneth Porter]

--On Sunday, August 01, 2021 9:28 PM +0000 "Livingood, Jason via Bloat" 
<bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> The "XB3" definitely lacks it - as it's DOCSIS 3.0-based. You may be
> eligible for a replacement, depending on your speed tier. Take a look at
> https://customer.xfinity.com/#/devices and see what that says. If that
> does not have anything that let's you replace it then send me an email
> 1:1 and I'll assist. Optimally you'll want an XB7 but an XB6 would also
> work fine based on your config. (and I wish it could do more of what you
> need on other areas)

How would I know which one I have? I can't find a model number on it and 
the web page "Gateway > Hardware > System Hardware" only shows the base 
model number of TG1682G, no suffix. Hardware Revision is 11.0.

I'd also consider buying my own, which might address my DHCP issue if the 
downloaded firmware doesn't take that away from me.

Re: [Bloat] [EXTERNAL] Re: Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Livingood, Jason]

That is the XB3 - see https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/broadband-gateways-userguides. It is DOCSIS 3.0 and you should definitely replace it. I will ping you 1:1.

On 8/1/21, 17:01, "Kenneth Porter" <shiva@sewingwitch.com> wrote:

    --On Sunday, August 01, 2021 9:28 PM +0000 "Livingood, Jason via Bloat"
    <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

    > The "XB3" definitely lacks it - as it's DOCSIS 3.0-based. You may be
    > eligible for a replacement, depending on your speed tier. Take a look at
    > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://customer.xfinity.com/*/devices__;Iw!!CQl3mcHX2A!UtxGWv5Ip9TPlLZIevdwcd1p5SZMUHq4XhANtaC17OhRCvEI5YADBjD349c3imPEbenwGA$  and see what that says. If that
    > does not have anything that let's you replace it then send me an email
    > 1:1 and I'll assist. Optimally you'll want an XB7 but an XB6 would also
    > work fine based on your config. (and I wish it could do more of what you
    > need on other areas)

    How would I know which one I have? I can't find a model number on it and
    the web page "Gateway > Hardware > System Hardware" only shows the base
    model number of TG1682G, no suffix. Hardware Revision is 11.0.

    I'd also consider buying my own, which might address my DHCP issue if the
    downloaded firmware doesn't take that away from me.

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Livingood, Jason]

WiFi is a different challenge as you know. In this case it varies depending on the radio chipset vendor and is on my list of things to work on...

JL

On 7/31/21, 13:50, "Simon Barber" <simon@superduper.net> wrote:

    Awesome to hear that you are turning this on both upstream and downstream. Do you know if the wifi stacks in your home routers also have AQM?

    Simon


    > On Jul 30, 2021, at 10:28 PM, Livingood, Jason via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
    >
    > FYI that I will be presenting a lightning talk at the IRTF MAPRG meeting today at 17:30 ET (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!XLFMYPw-gnJgHzz_1nF-N7dNeIeT4QD-5wQny8vdAfYE6bzHtVQD3-lqiQI9YwAncrZUew$ ). The talk links to a just-published paper at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!XLFMYPw-gnJgHzz_1nF-N7dNeIeT4QD-5wQny8vdAfYE6bzHtVQD3-lqiQI9YwCePfNyng$  (click PDF link in upper right of page) that will likely be of interest to these two lists.
    >
    > High-level: turning on AQM in the cable modem (upstream queue) took working latency from around 250 ms to between 15-30 ms, which is actually kind of cool. ;-) AQM is turned on in all of our CMTSes (downstream queue) and in DOCSIS 3.1 modems (upstream queue).
    >
    > Have a nice weekend,
    > Jason
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Bloat mailing list
    > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
    > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!XLFMYPw-gnJgHzz_1nF-N7dNeIeT4QD-5wQny8vdAfYE6bzHtVQD3-lqiQI9YwCIw2ZGww$

Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

[Livingood, Jason]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2828 bytes --]

Should be for COAM and leased. If you are having issues – you can email me 1:1 at this work address. Please include your modem make/model and account # so I can investigate. :-)

JL

From: Aaron Wood <woody77@gmail.com>
Date: Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 15:27
To: Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net>
Cc: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Bloat] Of interest: Comcast AQM Paper

If we see that AQM appears to be not functioning as expected for upstream connections on DOCSIS3.1, what's the right avenue for getting that resolved?  (and does that only apply to the Comcast-owned, vs. customer-owned, modems?)

On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 10:50 AM Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net<mailto:simon@superduper.net>> wrote:
Awesome to hear that you are turning this on both upstream and downstream. Do you know if the wifi stacks in your home routers also have AQM?

Simon


> On Jul 30, 2021, at 10:28 PM, Livingood, Jason via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>> wrote:
>
> FYI that I will be presenting a lightning talk at the IRTF MAPRG meeting today at 17:30 ET (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-maprg__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Rz15R4ZotXRWgIwMICwg0hP8rUn_zYmu7Xj_ujBrgBBYt5p7D8wGY4Toi7StQUQRf1LEmw$>). The talk links to a just-published paper at https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arxiv.org/abs/2107.13968__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Rz15R4ZotXRWgIwMICwg0hP8rUn_zYmu7Xj_ujBrgBBYt5p7D8wGY4Toi7StQUSKQx-diA$> (click PDF link in upper right of page) that will likely be of interest to these two lists.
>
> High-level: turning on AQM in the cable modem (upstream queue) took working latency from around 250 ms to between 15-30 ms, which is actually kind of cool. ;-) AQM is turned on in all of our CMTSes (downstream queue) and in DOCSIS 3.1 modems (upstream queue).
>
> Have a nice weekend,
> Jason
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Rz15R4ZotXRWgIwMICwg0hP8rUn_zYmu7Xj_ujBrgBBYt5p7D8wGY4Toi7StQUQ2nBiSiA$>

_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Rz15R4ZotXRWgIwMICwg0hP8rUn_zYmu7Xj_ujBrgBBYt5p7D8wGY4Toi7StQUQ2nBiSiA$>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5542 bytes --]