Re: [Bloat] Seen in passing: mention of Valve's networking scheme and RFC 5348

[Jesper Louis Andersen <jesper.louis.andersen@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1293 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:27 PM Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:

> please, please, people, take a look at the ietf taps (“transport
> services”) working group  :-)
>
>
I tried looking it up. It seems the TAPS WG is about building a consistent
interface to different protocols in order to get a new interface rather
than, say, the bsd socket interface.

But my search turned up several drafts from the WG. Did you have one in
particular in mind?

I think the major reason to implement new protocols inside UDP is mainly
due to a lot of existing devices out there, namely firewalls, NAT systems,
and so on. The internet is extending itself by successive patching of older
standards, rather than a replacement of older standards. I do note that
this is how biological systems tend to work as well, but I have no good
reason as to why that is what happens with internet standards where we in
principle could redesign things. But perhaps already deployed stuff makes
the systems susceptible to iterative patching.

The bufferbloat angle is also pretty clear: CoDel is a brilliant solution
but it requires you to change queues in the network. So it seems people are
trying to patch TCP instead, through something like BBR; again mimicking a
biological system.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1635 bytes --]