From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (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 1A8B23B29D for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 05:37:11 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1656668230; bh=00JJmxR+yUnC4dRafzlJGGloZautw6i0EeNc14kiLAI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=j49871PvidONR42NJk/oWsP6t+XGiZUxPwVLpFTFz4LZrtp4nAeIiATicxn4b37NF BPKn3/C7+3tv6O4VREr2YAENPCkEdnZJG+rafEqh4PYuGcs/nsukbOJYgY+fsxcHZO TWxVryBU6/kI09cobbVcMLOstE0+HCwkDOcc82SM= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from smtpclient.apple ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MjjCL-1nMeCb0AZ9-00lDS3; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 11:37:10 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.100.31\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:37:09 +0200 Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8E7E8800-E411-4098-AFEC-4B24FA34335C@gmx.de> References: To: Maximilian Bachl X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.100.31) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Zz4RSwjRpQQ13uzEA7nZ56uDkBUWpqegyPmYQWFzx9deqYOF0C9 +DvLuHfSGUPO+EIWfMzGRNk6aRjOxkAH2lUCfQwTO5QztiL2FZNsVN89ZMCp05occjd6HIu dP7iaVcPOq6CeJg0IO8vuxjC+dal6uXiOgZjziDiOLO1lguVEXQOhDFC8S0udsrZoH3/sKP URV/NoQlAil8xOu6FK1MA== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:IFKfluntntE=:mP7nBRpnjR9T5+jXSyMnWV NAu0Wl8AxbWOL2+UysfnLrL+w24X67XoT6rcqSViR+/2CeJeU4L8+yUbIR+Hx6kepa4qWfA9I +QfFzJG0FGZ6JLLenKOeqtvEshYoLelTLiTMnaZfuflxDsvupv2qgX/XRDhOYBXbGSknmzKuq 3usAgU9nky0hV43MiA5/y+tPNEiG597tN+TxwCJARXDCuFyvM2QQ/V5/6Rnuem2ofitLNgGR1 UQz17IXObgzO3+rWXVJGl3Vy4zTonOJ5SKtX3k1knu4CKUodcHVykbMorFaaeyw0DmC9wfG8W 33Wj6LcwVTFiEsTG0CwklsxAZHMP0BtWWr+u/8aJZcEGiesAv09ILGHpZl1dBFg+62X2bUUvP WIRD1AjDrUZ+buSDRX0JDCehVenJ/U7HOZceXzo7WAgmpTRwvaVb1VmCgL3rZwt/btJO8YUox KLfnz84wmVuPsjvM2zyTkL89Y8dbj5bQgmakTRBPY3r1uluCLJFSbO6ONYkw5m+DV+4Ab4x3O UOKuBsyxa+wf3Ta3uvcHyiNYnU3dt1uSEvv14nHzHFS3WqKTG+sE7+IqtLwskhkGUkNSWGTcu efvZXRJaiIqSn8t3AeHP1NZVKVkVYZesy9rZ9iA5QNFGDOYe3rtyJTbaHi0G33zjHTvLe43um rIyL7ZiQm0xM5XozwClHesMuaPxW/hVId+qLbFLDgsLTCI+FInKmASn4X0vMq0li7Vxz+X/1u JIj9ipEKTVkWpVEPg8CNPPxZ19E9KAm6bGohs/Ita+drf53FCChrHbobMNNEV0TKpGW8y56Rr 0ulbyFjEjoTJQvHy+tg8rQuUqXUaEFUO6jVyPQIgJb5xGcidcmre887dLCyA/bjuvyBpTloB2 DnuWLyZjAcBXvbdYZ/cwy/qPuK+N4kQKaXEdgd4tPgEYYuM8rOugVF4y8NkGwdvFFH8O3UjFW ENQTKNLq5fdParLAH57qCWGMY7jlHEUIsPVDr0WVWEQ6/ab2crK3Z6SclWQUAuBYXzGp7uF4k LNFicfTIaJAyvdmpeDeXXarkZoFche7fFnyURdpkjAyFk3ry7CNmpT+EWIoLhdypy98BdBPCm Q4aCN7/eCVTrr0MI36Tj3riV8K+76sgtK951oQQPKe5mRHK2i09BgATTA== Subject: Re: [Bloat] Fair queuing detection for congestion control 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: Fri, 01 Jul 2022 09:37:12 -0000 Hi Maximilian, I read the following: "D. Other variants of fair queuing We also evaluated the performance of our fair queuing detection on a = bottleneck managed by fq codel [5]. We chose a default target queuing = delay of 10ms following Apple=E2=80=99s implementation3 because we argue = that Apple probably spent a considerable amount of time fine-tuning = their implementation and came to the conclusion that 10 ms work best as = the default target delay." And wonder whether you could: a) repeat that experiment with fq_codel's defaults of 100ms interval and = 5ms target using the Linux implementation. I am not saying Apple might = not have a decent rationale for their choice, but as far as I can tell = they have not communicated that rationale. The Linux defaults however = are explained relatively well in e.g. fq_codel's IETF RFC. b) produce some CDF plots that show the detection accuracy for the = different RTTs and rates (you can probably combine either all RTTs or al = rates into one plot) c) maybe use signal detection theory terms to show the performance in = terms that include false positive and false negative classifications? Regards Sebastian > On Jun 27, 2022, at 18:23, Maximilian Bachl via Bloat = wrote: >=20 > This paper (pre-print)=20 > https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.10561 proposes a mechanism to monitor the = presence of FQ continuously during a flow=E2=80=99s lifetime. This can = be used to change the congestion control depending on the presence of = FQ. >=20 > Furthermore, the paper argues that the presence of FQ can be = considered a congestion signal: Only if there=E2=80=99s congestion, FQ = can be detected.=20 > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat