From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot0-x22a.google.com (mail-ot0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22a]) (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 AC9993CB38 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 08:45:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id a14-v6so4981324otf.6 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:45:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6TBVGuEkls0AyIZNq8EhxYMWOzl1UX4oV9bE0hPak6E=; b=JmFbIP/8cQK9hfIKwd5VpEaH5Afnu/c/AKZyaCzmKyrH0ineszDobdh2Al1ozzJiIU MFYMdEm54fvlKyIdt62Ryco/oXIkrHeDhjlttpaOKzkP8BKXphSRaTONj0lsFo73psET SYT2GDVw+4ginSQMlheRP4yvQf6Cpy5x1nh03qzZRrfGx4XTezWvvXkHzPHrBqML1VeJ YOdggqpYNNlvdOkD2a7NbYFirfJ6ohAc9+EC2f2WvRVE6jhfBcRRrof80wTtMo/CPfOJ TSRqVOwTD0T38TKfrnc6gV6KZzMfsOiVmNyMdWspL2HMBXnpgMR93UdHCCSy1lId7Wu+ cO0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6TBVGuEkls0AyIZNq8EhxYMWOzl1UX4oV9bE0hPak6E=; b=b6kmCm1jLb1Z6splf9dnAZ8o1rEwVIXealnnyzeuhO+StId7X+sRHWU+ICQgCF365A s7oCXDHpETNcyza9Oe6EigTGIeqIvpcsrsYFH7znzNjWHzFr92xVLWcAoWTTW96N/nk9 8QNrHSKRYKcwR5WXmuybQBITcXp5h7R8qNcXqqpbXudmUUBKxQ0K/Q+drOzEPXXTnxFd XNLUBI9DTbeXHPaKSbNgiOvlNRhFacYZM5RfrW7vDMORc7iPwbf7kL/iHQ6YJpvO7NSC CdhYzrhdQ2HkIt4/Nk0RtUwDXznz0Krmiklis0SpjxDScHrow8TRuRD1hzlrsiTQoLBE +bMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HHF5Y5Yu3K1soURh2dRsXMBEl0AikknLbFQLCNvZ1uJUET6KoY xKHXdf9qB7TjeLhB0InV8WAC+/JgufpXbGP0WQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+f7KPWPuMXkvKcva7IxUUOcrsT4mqyB43SfFtuFOCbUNBxEAT9KewnO+iV1N1Lv7se72wTl4CCFZQMwcWOcVc= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:1af:: with SMTP id e44-v6mr11356561ote.145.1522845952094; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:45:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50e57074-4ca5-59f7-f010-d9b2b845a8a7@rogers.com> <8DE589C3-9537-416D-AC7C-9250464869F9@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jesper Louis Andersen Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 12:45:41 +0000 Message-ID: To: Jim Gettys Cc: Michael Welzl , Jonathan Morton , bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000005b7810569053444" Subject: Re: [Bloat] Seen in passing: mention of Valve's networking scheme and RFC 5348 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: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 12:45:52 -0000 --00000000000005b7810569053444 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:04 PM Jim Gettys wrote: > =E2=80=8BTo get to really good RTT's (with low jitter), you still need = =E2=80=8Bfq_codel > (or similar). You just can't get there by hacking TCP no matter how hard > you try... > > I agree with you on all points here. However, any change which patches an existing bad system is far more likely to win in the long run, also if it is bad in some way. Momentum is a killer of good solutions. I wish I had a ramification for this observation, but I currently don't. My hunch is that every new generation of young programmers wants to put their mark on the system. As a result, they take what worked well on level N-1 and proceed to build N on top of it. But the beanstalk never withers, so each level is present in said stack, still, after all these years. (Aside: The codel approach also has worked really well for me internally in Erlang systems as a way to maintain queue load. Far better than many other flow control schemes). --00000000000005b7810569053444 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:04 PM Jim Gettys <jg@freedesktop.org> wrote:
=E2=80=8BTo get to really g= ood RTT's (with low jitter), you still need =E2=80=8Bfq_codel (or simil= ar).=C2=A0 You just can't get there by hacking TCP no matter how hard y= ou try...


I agree with you on all points here. However,= any change which patches an existing bad system is far more likely to win = in the long run, also if it is bad in some way. Momentum is a killer of goo= d solutions. I wish I had a ramification for this observation, but I curren= tly don't.

My hunch is that eve= ry new generation of young programmers wants to put their mark on the syste= m. As a result, they take what worked well on level N-1 and proceed to buil= d N on top of it. But the beanstalk never withers, so each level is present= in said stack, still, after all these years.

(Aside: The codel approach also has worked really well for me in= ternally in Erlang systems as a way to maintain queue load. Far better than= many other flow control schemes).
--00000000000005b7810569053444--