Sharing the picture and link directly (because Gmail let me to do it): https://camo.githubusercontent.com/bbbcbf00baa8455073b8a9676d0a6d46a7aee25c7e456a44ad51b64abb30db5a/687474703a2f2f7363652e646e736d67722e6e65742f726573756c74732f6c34732d323032302d31312d3131543132303030302d66696e616c2f73312d6368617274732f727474666169725f63635f71646973635f38306d735f38306d732e737667 All the best, Frank Frantisek (Frank) Borsik https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 Skype: casioa5302ca frantisek.borsik@gmail.com On Wed, 22 May 2024 at 7:40 AM, Sebastian Moeller via Bloat < bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > Dear All, > > since my attached image did not seem to make it to the list (thanks > Frantisek for letting me know) here a link to the image: > h++ps > ://camo.githubusercontent.com/bbbcbf00baa8455073b8a9676d0a6d46a7aee25c7e456a44ad51b64abb30db5a/687474703a2f2f7363652e646e736d67722e6e65742f726573756c74732f6c34732d323032302d31312d3131543132303030302d66696e616c2f73312d6368617274732f727474666169725f63635f71646973635f38306d735f38306d732e737667 > Due my mail agents outgoing SPAM marking I need to replace the 't' in the > URL with + signs.... > > The point remains, TCP Prague does not gracefully compete with Cubic in a > FIFO bottleneck, and given that many bottlenecks are still FIFOs that does > not bode well for TCP Prague. It is unclear whether that is simply a > bug/misfeature in Prague or whether that is a consequence of L4S > signalling. IMHO the IETF has done the internet a disservice to ratify the > L4S RFC before making sure that everything works as expected. > > The whole L4S ratification process disillusioned me about the IETF in > general and TSVWG specifically. I understand and accept that horse-trading > is unavoidable when groups of humans cooperate, but in the IETF the gap > between the 'no politics' motto and the amount of horse-trading that > actually happens is breathtaking... > Exemplified by the fact that nobody seems to bother that chairs and ADs > are not even trying to be impartial, but pretend they can separate > themselves out into a 'chair' and a 'non-chair' persona... And the fact > that WG members see no harm in having private only strategy discussions > with chairs and ADs. I am not saying that these things are necessarily > below the board, but there clearly is plenty of opportunity. > But enough of that. > > > My > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > *From: *Sebastian Moeller via Bloat > *Subject: **Re: [Bloat] "Very interesting L4S presentation from Nokia > Bell Labs on tap for RIPE 88 in Krakow this week! "* > *Date: *21. May 2024 at 19:32:47 CEST > *To: *"Livingood, Jason" > *Cc: *Jonathan Morton , bloat < > bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> > *Reply-To: *Sebastian Moeller > > Hi Jason, > > > On 21. May 2024, at 19:13, Livingood, Jason via Bloat < > bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > On 5/21/24, 12:19, "Bloat on behalf of Jonathan Morton via Bloat wrote: > > Notice in particular that the only *performance* comparisons they make are > between L4S and no AQM at all, not between L4S and conventional AQM - even > though they now mention that the latter *exists*. > > > I cannot speak to the Nokia deck. But in our field trials we have > certainly compared single queue AQM to L4S, and L4S flows perform better. > > There's also no mention whatsoever of what happens when L4S traffic meets > a conventional AQM. > > > We also tested this and all is well; the performance of classic queue with > AQM is fine. > > > [SM] I think you are thinking of a different case than Jonathan, not > classic traffic in the C-queue, but L4S traffic (ECT(1)) that by chance is > not hiting abottleneck employing DualQ but the traditional FIFO... > This is the case where at least TCP Prague just folds it, gives up and > goes home... > > Here is Pete's data showing that, the middle two bars show what happens > when the bottleneck is not treating TCP Prague to the expected signalling... > > > > That is not really fit for use over the open internet... > > Regards > Sebastian > > > > > Jason > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >