From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com (mail-io1-xd34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57DD33CB35 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 10:08:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id r194so25670561iod.7 for ; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:08:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/u0l+0lwHBfQPm1GaBTofGm8wCjjryH+/8/Ao5Q8/7o=; b=RcEFCugoKKlGu4orzU/vJZau0sxzafMkwoyvnzH/wJwANbAB/1d3p76nYsbnia00oW Ilc4InK/7P5xmX7K7RQa21goYGfmGHgNyqwaxaBI31W4IO76nOQ/oKlA5k6A7hblOq3e bmO6DXI6DnB1uJAh3xCrXrlF0rv8T46RJwj9A9kiWVKtgMCzobsPbFSH0cdSHqnX6nbe 5O4Ll3fb4fQnFVqfKn/sgeLtdDGjME9I3wQTLdK+deAY5aaIVQcDoHGA7sBwVAqD6yFS CEW7G2gPtwGp6jaM/l15UdUU9JXmCvWVbgBj7JRIudGIqD9fDVFvK7cmvljqIizjYWn2 t46g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/u0l+0lwHBfQPm1GaBTofGm8wCjjryH+/8/Ao5Q8/7o=; b=sXviu9RvCkSsSSw4rbPFTdWbgX7gsBE4Sj+4uXMI6IVSiLAJ+lZpM2SNTVB90cVKDX XwsS77kcG7Ggvq1J9ar+ZpcN/CJnkwpO+0JACkoJQLwCZCO8X499DcEabZrBH/I/d943 gX67fnxDCWi+378pxWD/XhiTrYg77B40OX6+YZOaVNJ3ExPR67zXmH5gF+xOzRgqAY32 1t5LXBOLoaKWkmV42VBiX0QhcRyrkwUwjMY+le+KTE2A7qxVzUJPfGhJ2rWVHgeweUvN f1aW1gKfpYEGYSgY00QZPzwQuGc0MjZtgjfElj3FFDqFPAf5oRPiHv/yOGUGRiUPL9FY dnEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yGevwOoC/gCB2oSiV84OmKt6Z7xoukSXANh5aFjCAskSGU1dl h3B/Y9oZXjjcfk+NslgZRMimGP0Q95AIGroDPhOm1BQu X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGbmo/9yvgK5Ictx3dt9VySldWTg1ir6JYGqQAUYXlsRIyxnHo3ifz3d/Y7Gu/UyJNQEiB6WVr0t9o6H38uiU= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9d46:: with SMTP id k6mr25794707iok.55.1635862080593; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:08:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 07:07:47 -0700 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B8rn_Ivar_Teigen?= Cc: bloat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Bloat] Beyond Bufferbloat: End-to-End Congestion Control Cannot Avoid Latency Spikes 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: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 14:08:01 -0000 I am very pre-coffee. Something that could build on this would involve FQ. More I cannot say, til more coffee. On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:56 AM Bj=C3=B8rn Ivar Teigen wrot= e: > > Hi everyone, > > I've recently published a paper on Arxiv which is relevant to the Bufferb= loat problem. I hope it will be helpful in convincing AQM doubters. > Discussions at the recent IAB workshop inspired me to write a detailed ar= gument for why end-to-end methods cannot avoid latency spikes. I couldn't f= ind this argument in the literature. > > Here is the Arxiv link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.00488 > > A direct consequence is that we need AQMs at all points in the internet w= here congestion is likely to happen, even for short periods, to mitigate th= e impact of latency spikes. Here I am assuming we ultimately want an Intern= et without lag-spikes, not just low latency on average. > > Hope you find this interesting! > > -- > Bj=C3=B8rn Ivar Teigen > Head of Research > +47 47335952 | bjorn@domos.no | www.domos.no > WiFi Slicing by Domos > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat --=20 I tried to build a better future, a few times: https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC