From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5FBF21F444 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:38:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by oiav63 with SMTP id v63so19970298oia.13 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:38:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ZwF0WqBk0hIyurdUi2SfI+/3edV4NwlLxZev/Q5SypA=; b=UO2B3Am1cRAEcfJ+7gh9gMrXG05odWtEzd8waMl5ZomK9aPp3QWEhFfSgDWR9upPj7 92zm2aIOTdDyc34F9UjopyocowoR9CUZVGDw9W5D/X07D1z0yeXZeYszgf+i+uDnIeAr 6K80dyidrZKZ2jCA+jdpr4Xypho6cDDmsTL/gA0aJ6pPfQcoExtCbnw67XEI1LC6LzgX qHJSFFhJIDChpdr11Ka4604Tw+Mc3spXQlQwFj3YMOK42PHJnvAzc/hrsu77skbc3Hva j1LbCdBZwNAEDUWy8WkpsljA64cJI60A/ChtHNLHZNig6R07B6mpGcwk6jPlq9HP12N7 3JQg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.7.1 with SMTP id 1mr11815914oih.16.1425677886566; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:38:06 -0800 (PST) Sender: akkartik@gmail.com Received: by 10.202.105.18 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:38:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:38:06 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: NOH7KzlyRKwg4Rfy7meOWYqh0vg Message-ID: From: Kartik Agaram To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d19d6fe37f00510a57ffc X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 07:41:04 -0700 Cc: Jordan Peacock Subject: [Bloat] http/2 X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:38:35 -0000 --001a113d19d6fe37f00510a57ffc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Has HTTP/2[1] been discussed on this list?[2] I've been thinking about bufferbloat as I read the spec, and had a couple of questions that weren't answered in the FAQ[3]: 1. HTTP/2 reduces the number of connections per webpage. Assume for a second that all players instantaneously adopt HTTP/2 and so reduce their buffer sizes everywhere. Latencies will improve and there'll be less congestion. Now back to the real world with people building websites, trying to improve performance of websites and devices all over the place. Will bufferbloat stay eradicated, or will the gains be temporary? 2. More generally, is there any technical way for bufferbloat to stay solved? Or is it an inevitable tragedy of the commons dynamic that we just have to live with and make temporary dents in? 3. Has there been discussion of solving bufferbloat at the TCP layer, by making buffers harder to fill up? I'm thinking of heuristics like disallowing a single site from using 80% of the buffer, thereby leaving some slack available for other bursty requirements. I'm sure these questions are quite naive. Pointers to further reading greatly appreciated. Kartik http://akkartik.name/about [1] https://insouciant.org/tech/http-slash-2-considerations-and-tradeoffs [2] Google search on "site:https://lists.bufferbloat.net" didn't turn up anything, and I get "permission denied" when trying to access the downloadable archives at https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat. [3] https://gettys.wordpress.com/bufferbloat-faq --001a113d19d6fe37f00510a57ffc Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Has HTTP/2[1] been discussed on this list?[2] I'v= e been thinking about bufferbloat as I read the spec, and had a couple of q= uestions that weren't answered in the FAQ[3]:

1. HTTP= /2 reduces the number of connections per webpage. Assume for a second that = all players instantaneously adopt HTTP/2 and so reduce their buffer sizes e= verywhere. Latencies will improve and there'll be less congestion. Now = back to the real world with people building websites, trying to improve per= formance of websites and devices all over the place. Will bufferbloat stay = eradicated, or will the gains be temporary?

2. More gener= ally, is there any technical way for bufferbloat to stay solved? Or is it a= n inevitable tragedy of the commons dynamic that we just have to live with = and make temporary dents in?

3. Has there been= discussion of solving bufferbloat at the TCP layer, by making buffers hard= er to fill up? I'm thinking of heuristics like disallowing a single sit= e from using 80% of the buffer, thereby leaving some slack available for ot= her bursty requirements.

I'm sure these questions are quite naiv= e. Pointers to further reading greatly appreciated.

Karti= k
[2] Google search on &q= uot;site:https://lists.bufferbloa= t.net" didn't turn up anything, and I get "permission den= ied" when trying to access the downloadable archives at https://lists.bufferbloat.net/p= ipermail/bloat.

[3] https://gettys.wordpress.com/bufferbloat-faq
--001a113d19d6fe37f00510a57ffc--