From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com (mail-ej1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) (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 AF4A43B29E for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 18:28:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id l3so7515210ejc.4 for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 15:28:20 -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=eBsLgB20hvi33LrIIMZnSUpH2RIP/gSrtGvknJFDQeE=; b=eLq5/u4BfLppZBg20Q7uSkDuLuV9BkMV8qBu87g9EJq0K48FDcMxY28MuqhWSrJ/jJ gpsV79kmIUJeJama2F8+VyInP9786bgjXX42d2u3tiwYuJdPjEtwfKcT6a+BrRofqK7o xtq2XGjKckbWGSSW5g7nAXC+Gjhz1ZVgJXTipP6Ly/P9r+ddGBKBpzDEKqi62IfHCZ5Q H8igs9+gtjiw1tk5YvTWrGevgYfGX8hbiL7i+wOwePrJzafqY8rIB3TaXVU1vfQ1Bwbn F6jAe1n+oZVggFNUy3hcIh6MiG1UYev9Nni9bqYOeMjJwL8t0g+x6wDbNJEpaar9IzXJ YgZA== 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=eBsLgB20hvi33LrIIMZnSUpH2RIP/gSrtGvknJFDQeE=; b=e4240JrH5CP/wksJ2MQwRzg6y4TCExvhyrIxRqr51GEsucLHJMs6UKQgQkxIyXXjUx Yalrsox0dR/60Lh5LklK9tksa88VDoiG6fdsRKccXCLFp4JlnzQ/VEayU995hOg+x/Pu XOc8Htk6iZYBkWzwcvzma1XdH617AemGZe4Y2t6P0IWDO2qFY6mm2NTxNxtA3pgklsoe RnD1z0L9R+dtunmc41qHtH+h4sjwBuQsKe7JsXnyl9eQuMUSA2bSRdlZmN+8jYNVdTyM jPL+vQfu71U/Q6L31iePSkQu1Q76jaCbiYELbm5Hmxn2DZ/e07eExhzD0Zre45LmNuHi vvQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531IerFSRqNBCRCjjg28kVAbA4BlvW6G6JG1JFhQBijkIof2n1By t7HjysYVZt656lRNLf4SiOelsZcPO1ygYUyJuDY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz8oNF7kzYHwCEclAkVZhKwB5E0fsDUAk0MpImLIaDlMjhKQY6x7sfz6pOWc92yJYtQ16NQH9EQd43yBtU5ruE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:6d43:: with SMTP id a3mr11121106ejt.142.1622240899594; Fri, 28 May 2021 15:28:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8CA408F6-C8FA-4AAF-908A-B52BDC5030FF@cable.comcast.com> <3DC2F247-63C2-4753-9E44-2F494E545FEA@apple.com> In-Reply-To: From: Aaron Wood Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 15:28:08 -0700 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: Jonathan Morton , "bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008f7d8b05c36b641b" Subject: Re: [Bloat] AQM & Net Neutrality 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: Fri, 28 May 2021 22:28:20 -0000 --0000000000008f7d8b05c36b641b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think one of the big advantages that AQM has is that it doesn't know, or care, who the flow is. It can't, itself, violate NN concerns because it has no knowledge with which to do so. Instead, it punishes the greed flows that try to use more than their fair share of the available bandwidth. It doesn't really favor one protocol, or provider, or site, or anything else, because it's not aware of them, as such. Instead it just stops the kid that's trying to take all the candy from the candy bowl, to make sure there's enough for everyone else in line. The working could perhaps be softened from "punished", perhaps, depending on the audience. "Everyone gets an equal slice, up to their fill" is another way of looking at it, I think. On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:36 AM Dave Taht wrote: > oops, wrong link for the that plea to both sides of the debate. The > correct link was: > > http://blog.cerowrt.org/post/net_neutrality_customers/ > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:32 AM Dave Taht wrote: > > > > I made the most articulate pleas I could to both sides of the debate on > this: > > > > > https://blog.apnic.net/2020/01/22/bufferbloat-may-be-solved-but-its-not-o= ver-yet/ > > > > I do think that now that the scandal here has reached a peak: > > https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/oag-fakecommentsreport.pdf > > > > that perhaps an honest appraisal of both AQM and fq+aqm technologies ca= n > be had > > in public, again. I'd be willing to reach across the isle on this, and > > patiently explain stuff to lawmakers where their thinking is > > incorrect, in order to finally fix bufferbloat. > > > > -- > Latest Podcast: > https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6791014284936785920/ > > Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --0000000000008f7d8b05c36b641b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think one of the big advantages that AQM has is that it = doesn't know, or care, who the flow is.=C2=A0 It can't, itself, vio= late NN concerns because it has no knowledge with which to do so.

<= /div>
Instead, it punishes the greed flows that try to use more than th= eir fair share of the available bandwidth.=C2=A0 It doesn't really favo= r one protocol, or provider, or site, or anything else, because it's no= t aware of them, as such.=C2=A0 Instead it just stops the kid that's tr= ying to take all the candy from the candy bowl, to make sure there's en= ough for everyone else in line.

The working could = perhaps be softened from "punished", perhaps, depending on the au= dience.

"Everyone gets an equal slice, up to = their fill" is another way of looking at it, I think.

<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">
On Wed, May= 26, 2021 at 11:36 AM Dave Taht <= dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
oops, wrong li= nk for the that plea to both sides of the debate. The
correct link was:

http://blog.cerowrt.org/post/net_neutrality_cu= stomers/

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:32 AM Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I made the most articulate pleas I could to both sides of the debate o= n this:
>
> https://blog.a= pnic.net/2020/01/22/bufferbloat-may-be-solved-but-its-not-over-yet/
>
> I do think that now that the scandal here has reached a peak:
> https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default= /files/oag-fakecommentsreport.pdf
>
> that perhaps an honest appraisal of both AQM and fq+aqm technologies c= an be had
> in public, again. I'd be willing to reach across the isle on this,= and
> patiently explain stuff to lawmakers where their thinking is
> incorrect, in order to finally fix bufferbloat.



--
Latest Podcast:
https://www.linkedin.com/fe= ed/update/urn:li:activity:6791014284936785920/

Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@list= s.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
--0000000000008f7d8b05c36b641b--