From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from rn-mailsvcp-ppex-lapp24.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-ppex-lapp24.rno.apple.com [17.179.253.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D01A3B2A4 for ; Mon, 24 May 2021 15:18:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pps.filterd (rn-mailsvcp-ppex-lapp24.rno.apple.com [127.0.0.1]) by rn-mailsvcp-ppex-lapp24.rno.apple.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 14OJGt1O003505; Mon, 24 May 2021 12:18:29 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apple.com; h=content-type : mime-version : subject : from : in-reply-to : date : cc : content-transfer-encoding : message-id : references : to; s=20180706; bh=euEXGBdIVCR7l86egwsCttZv/wvMxvdcjfTOW3icYdc=; b=jBI36+jyCDaUBwooduT84+ZObaqcmcvDf3TKESaRNhAfNezg7wKeE316VJ5ZKsMmsqio pdyDhNW+gITiN2AN+Tn6+l14sW+sV0mmlpCEs2fY+sAmsAU+NmM+eIxZ5MhKZbV0zxeq HszSXHfKNfOeL97ba/9WHIISpLEboRKgcJMl5tOA2L6RWhIdE7/ePvzl6+gQh38u35Ho /hhNDOd/asBAXl8Zd8yuiHwCqydG5oP7ATS42k/8Cm4/80DHAx8r0ggVNF+RJKmH9sCa slx5DczHi55qaVzUAJmqHq8Yrs1aDxfjia/9uqq8xexvhtRiOjxmeZHnPvz8FgpGkyiR lg== Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp02.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp02.rno.apple.com [10.225.203.150]) by rn-mailsvcp-ppex-lapp24.rno.apple.com with ESMTP id 38qhqd2aay-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 24 May 2021 12:18:29 -0700 Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com [17.179.253.17]) by rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp02.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.9.20210415 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) with ESMTPS id <0QTM00CV7LMTH050@rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp02.rno.apple.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 12:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_milters-daemon.rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.7.20201203 64bit (built Dec 3 2020)) id <0QTM00E00LE5W100@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 12:18:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-A: X-Va-T-CD: 81ca60fce39c2560b6c4a7e5841f9b8f X-Va-E-CD: ac5a0a5cc1e9ab28244b94cd1eb60e32 X-Va-R-CD: 26a4d2961246e2a8f34ec1e21178901e X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: 2d044001-a29a-4bdd-b9a3-b2fa50346abe X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 81ca60fce39c2560b6c4a7e5841f9b8f X-V-E-CD: ac5a0a5cc1e9ab28244b94cd1eb60e32 X-V-R-CD: 26a4d2961246e2a8f34ec1e21178901e X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 4f888a2f-24de-4662-982e-a912ce0f91b6 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-05-24_08:2021-05-24, 2021-05-24 signatures=0 Received: from [17.234.65.118] (unknown [17.234.65.118]) by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.7.20201203 64bit (built Dec 3 2020)) with ESMTPSA id <0QTM001G3LMS6O00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp04.rno.apple.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 12:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Stuart Cheshire In-reply-to: <8CA408F6-C8FA-4AAF-908A-B52BDC5030FF@cable.comcast.com> Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 12:18:28 -0700 Cc: "bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: <3DC2F247-63C2-4753-9E44-2F494E545FEA@apple.com> References: <8CA408F6-C8FA-4AAF-908A-B52BDC5030FF@cable.comcast.com> To: "Livingood, Jason" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-05-24_08:2021-05-24, 2021-05-24 signatures=0 Subject: Re: [Bloat] AQM & Net Neutrality X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 19:18:31 -0000 On 24 May 2021, at 06:09, Livingood, Jason via Bloat = wrote: > I=E2=80=99m looking for opinions here re bloat-busting techniques like = AQM in the context of network neutrality (NN). The worry I have is = whether some non-technical people will misunderstand how AQM works & = conclude that implementing it may violate NN because it would make = interactive traffic perform better than it does today. That is true of = course =E2=80=93 it=E2=80=99s a design goal of AQM, but non-interactive = traffic performs as well as it always has =E2=80=93 it is not = disadvantaged. There=E2=80=99s a faulty assumption buried in this, a common = misunderstanding that we need to correct. Consistently lower delay benefits *all* applications. The lower the = round-trip time, the better TCP fast-retransmit works. TCP connection = setup is faster. The TLS handshake is faster. The less buffering in the = network, the less application-layer buffering is required for streaming = video, giving quicker startup times, and quicker random access. If you = try to make a list of applications that *don=E2=80=99t* benefit from = lower delays, you=E2=80=99ll probably end up with an empty list. This is why I=E2=80=99ve been advocating for making low delay available = for *any* traffic that chooses to opt-in to this smarter queue = management, not selectively for just some privileged traffic. I=E2=80=99m = not making any subjective value judgement that video conferencing = traffic is more important or more deserving that streaming video = traffic, or weather forecasts, or driving directions, or software = downloads. I do not support traffic prioritization schemes that = privilege some traffic types over others. I support making low delay = available to *all* traffic that agrees to behave properly and cooperate = to keep the queues short -- meaning packet pacing, responding = appropriately to congestion signals, etc. Delay reduction is not an either/or choice. In order for some traffic to = benefit other traffic doesn=E2=80=99t have to suffer. It=E2=80=99s not a = zero-sum game. Eliminating standing queues in network buffers benefits = all traffic. This can be hard to communicate because it seems counter to = human intuition. It sounds too good to be true. In normal human life = this is uncommon. When first class passengers board the plane first, all = economy passengers wait a little bit longer as a result. Computer = network queueing doesn=E2=80=99t operate like that, which makes it hard = to explain by analogy to everyday experiences that most people = understand. I talked about this six years ago in my presentation at the Apple = developer conference: There=E2=80=99s also a neat demo a little earlier in that same video: Stuart Cheshire