From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nm14-vm8.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm14-vm8.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.222]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E7A521F301 for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2014 07:48:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.170] by nm14.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jun 2014 14:48:33 -0000 Received: from [67.195.23.148] by tm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jun 2014 14:48:33 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp120.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jun 2014 14:48:33 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rogers.com; s=s1024; t=1402152513; bh=m4qv2VWCUNubNEydaan4Bm2ZaT9r3NZ0lxxvoMyas5k=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:X-Enigmail-Version:Content-Type; b=oVukqWHo5X+m+8Uxvp9LpgwI6JohgsGBROgxKZh/XWDQQ1cohzJSszZcdne2S3FJ+1aTYNRy1nmCTK0aE7/fmyTPCwnQsqXgxDndVu4fen2B3KZAIqRwwqSSsPP374mznrG7pFEuTUU2YPUVJcV/Bu4sJFIYglrnFnbJ/WAZBBU= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 539116.17650.bm@smtp120.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: YGHebTcVM1kTsAbJCtsqUF3dheHgGMrc1gMVwT6GtXuo3H3 zXU4OUZjjAGpwfZLNe9XYH3QE1OSDwFrICSbsZ8xQ.nhLr..TAJw_ElOCe55 FcpcylhWWnCgMeqrNpP3fH_JbwwvEC5htH6vVEbSv.AWrfzOnV7rnUdUCZ5I YrBskTeEXO5rr74K5LJ0u.oFzB9xS29VTfDYsMNSx3Ygrqx5cb45XX7WXIgF 9h9GZjI2M2hwjU5GxgQxf_H4WgBjCi5PMly6SdgZN37I2DFxWFFzUfBMdLpU JiRNtAPBd1n3BrbWdMTgmG.Fzi73fy8d2fKFfsGGijFZ6Ds5UVy3lI6KbUN4 ci8HZa_23MJZ4fXWPopod9zfyGyCIuhWO2o0FRfdbab669F.nOMeA6SsD4Zp FgQDNjBAMYiK.HBRLUfKeIfjTDhro_PU0jbMu.nL1Gi8Y2E.qI2upTsJ1Gj4 sAmlqjaCz4T0SP24evek34VWyvayKlZkeuR8sLLgN1i2zCd25GO7xz2Pev2b BxtCiMoWgb3CGh9wQaWHGHBeOefVfafTtiYtpzsyM X-Yahoo-SMTP: sltvjZWswBCRD.ElTuB1l9j6s9wRYPpuyTNWOE5oEg-- X-Rocket-Received: from [192.168.0.13] (davec-b@99.225.150.135 with plain [67.195.22.104]) by smtp120.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 07 Jun 2014 14:48:33 +0000 UTC Message-ID: <53932640.7010504@rogers.com> Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 10:48:32 -0400 From: David Collier-Brown User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bloat , bloat References: <1402138375-ace6f65271058161063ac1bd71e214a9@hill-a.ch> In-Reply-To: <1402138375-ace6f65271058161063ac1bd71e214a9@hill-a.ch> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090007010902070007080202" Subject: [Bloat] Fwd: [Internet Policy] Back to the root justification... X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: davecb@spamcop.net List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 14:48:36 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090007010902070007080202 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For people interested, there is a discussion of the roots of the "network neutrality" concept at internetpolicy@elists.isoc.org Some of it seems, to my eyes, to be uninformed by the community that works in the AQM space, so I see perfectly serious quotes like > > Longer packets might be dropped in favor of shorter ones. Packets > in a > burst might be dropped in favor of ones that are spaced out. > > This gets back to the point of neutrality - which describes some > level > of "equivalence", but there's never just one version of > equivalence that > everyone will accept. > > If you want to preserve the Internet architecture, you need to > make sure > that: > > Packets shall not be discriminated except on their inherent > properties (size, time of arrival) or explicit user-inserted > label (e.g., a QoS tag). > > If you want to make sure that packets are "fairly dropped", > there's no > single such thing; one link might be bandwidth limited (so drop > proportional to length is fair), and the next might be header > processing > limited (so per-packet drop is fair); for a given path, there's no > single mechanism that satisfies the variety of fairnesses that > could be > required. > If anyone's also interested in Network Neutrality and its roots, please feel free to hop over and contribute some informed opinions (;-)) --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest davecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain --------------090007010902070007080202 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For people interested, there is a discussion of the roots of the "network neutrality" concept at internetpolicy@elists.isoc.org

Some of it seems, to my eyes, to be uninformed by the community that works in the AQM space, so I see perfectly serious quotes like
Longer packets might be dropped in favor of shorter ones. Packets in a
burst might be dropped in favor of ones that are spaced out.

This gets back to the point of neutrality - which describes some level
of "equivalence", but there's never just one version of equivalence that
everyone will accept.

If you want to preserve the Internet architecture, you need to make sure
that:

Packets shall not be discriminated except on their inherent
properties (size, time of arrival) or explicit user-inserted
label (e.g., a QoS tag).

If you want to make sure that packets are "fairly dropped", there's no
single such thing; one link might be bandwidth limited (so drop
proportional to length is fair), and the next might be header processing
limited (so per-packet drop is fair); for a given path, there's no
single mechanism that satisfies the variety of fairnesses that could be
required.
If anyone's also interested in Network Neutrality and its roots, please feel free to hop over and contribute some informed opinions (;-))

--dave




-- 
David Collier-Brown,         | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
davecb@spamcop.net           |                      -- Mark Twain
--------------090007010902070007080202--