Re: [Bloat] bloat on wifi8 and 802.11 wg

[Dorothy Stanley <dstanley1389@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4812 bytes --]

To view the submissions that have been made to the
802.11 Working Group on the topic of L4S, please see
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents?is_dcn=l4s

All freely and publicly available.

Dorothy

----------------------
Dorothy Stanley
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
dorothy.stanley@hpe.com <dstanley@arubanetworks.com>
dstanley1389@gmail.com
dstanley@ieee.org
+1 630-363-1389 <630-363-1389>


On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:35 AM Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wish I had gone to the 802.11wg  more regularly than I did. I only
> gave one bloat related presentation in 2014, shipped the
> make-wifi-fast code in 2016(?), and never went back. IETF ate all my
> money and time. I just assumed they were all in the slipstream of
> linux and openwrt. :/
>
> I did have a great meetup a few weeks back with the former 802.11
> chair (dorothy stanley, hi!!!) who is trying to recruit people to
> participate in the wifi8 standard and perhaps some finishing touches
> on wifi7. She gave a great update on the status of things at the
> recent wifinow conference, but as there is a cost to that, perhaps she
> can share her slides with us?
>
>
> https://wifinowglobal.com/product/wi-fi-world-congress-usa-2024-sarasota-florida-presentations-pdf/?mc_cid=beb1b4a2ed&mc_eid=327a64ba92
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:28 AM Livingood, Jason via Bloat
> <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >
> > Dropping Starlink as Bloat is the right list. The IEEE 802.11 domain is
> certainly different than IP, so typical IP CCs don’t apply. In our L4S/NQB
> trials, we put LL-marked packets into the AC_VI WMM queue in the Wi-Fi
> network. IMO there is more work in 802.11 to focus on latency – so much
> focus right now is on throughput over everything else.
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Starlink <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of
> Rich Brown via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> > Reply-To: Rich Brown <richb.hanover@gmail.com>
> > Date: Wednesday, May 8, 2024 at 07:33
> > To: David Fernández <davidfdzp@gmail.com>
> > Cc: starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>, bloat <
> bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Starlink] [Bloat] L4S
> >
> >
> >
> > Let's split this thread and use this message to continue the discussion
> of L4S. Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > On May 8, 2024, at 5:31 AM, David Fernández via Starlink <
> starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I see that L4S is not really solving everything (I read about issues
> with Wi-Fi), although it seems to be a step in the right direction, to be
> improved, let's hope.
> >
> >
> >
> > At least, Nokia is implementing it in its network gear (for mobile
> operators), so the bufferbloat problem is somehow acknowledged by industry,
> at least initially or partially.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have seen two consecutive RFCs to 9330:
> >
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9331
> >
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9332
> >
> >
> >
> > I suspect that optimal results require the bufferbloat to be addressed
> not only at network layer (IP), but also with some pipelining or
> cross-layering at link level (Ethernet, Wi-Fi or any other link technology,
> such as 5G, SATCOM, VHF...)
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > David F.
> >
> >
> >
> > Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 08:46:03 -0400
> >
> > From: Dave Collier-Brown <dave.collier-Brown@indexexchange.com>
> > To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem
> > Message-ID: <3d6bdccf-e3d1-4f62-a029-25bfd1f458f5@indexexchange.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
> >
> > It has an RFC at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9330/
> >
> > I read it as a way to rapidly find the available bandwidth without the
> TCP "sawtooth". The paper cites fc_codel and research based on it.
> >
> > I suspect My Smarter Colleagues know more (;-))
> >
> > --dave
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2024-05-07 08:13, David Fernández via Starlink wrote:
> > Is L4S a solution to bufferbloat? I have read that gamers are happy with
> it.
> >
> > Sorry, I read it here, in Spanish:
> >
> https://www.adslzone.net/noticias/operadores/retardo-videojuegos-nokia-vodafone
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > David F.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Starlink mailing list
> > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bloat mailing list
> > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>
>
> --
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFWSyMp3xg&t=1098s Waves Podcast
> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9904 bytes --]