General list for discussing Bufferbloat
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Elsayed <eternaleye@gmail.com>
To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Bloat done correctly?
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:51:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <mlf9o8$tl3$1@ger.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6AD8E150-5751-43AC-8F6C-8175C1E92DE1@gmx.de>

Sebastian Moeller wrote:

> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> To go off onto a tangent:
> 
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce
> <bcronce@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> [...]
>> Under load while doing P2P(About 80Mb down and 20Mb up just as I started
>> the test) HFSC: P2P in 20% queue and 80/443/8080 in 40% queue with ACKs
>> going to a 20% realtime queue http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/622452
> 
> I know this is not really your question, but I think the ACKs should go
> into the same queue as the matching data packets. Think about it that way,
> if the data is delayed due to congestion it does not make too much sense
> to tell the sender to send more faster (which essentially is what ACK
> prioritization does) as that will not really reduce the congestion but
> rather increase it. There is one caveat though: when ECN is used it might
> make sense to send out the ACK that will signal the congestion state back
> to the sender faster… So if you prioritize ACKs only select those with an
> ECN-Echo flag ;) @bloat : What do you all think about this refined ACK
> prioritization scheme?

I'd say that this is wrongly attempting to bind upstream congestion to 
downstream congestion.

Let's have two endpoints, A and B. There exists a stream sent from A towards 
B.

If A does not receive an ack from B in a timely manner, it draws inference 
as to the congestion on the path _towards_ B. Prioritizing acks from B to A 
thus makes this _more accurate to reality_ - a lost ack (rather than the 
absence of an ack due to a lost packet) actually behaves as misinformation 
to the sender, causing them to

1.) back off sending when the sending channel is not congested and
2.) resend a packet that _already arrived_.

The latter point is a big one: Prioritized ACKs (may) reduce spurious 
resends, especially on asymmetric connections - and suprious resends are 
pure network inefficiency. Especially since the data packets are likely far 
larger than the ACKs. Which would _also_ get resent.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-06-12 18:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-12  4:45 Benjamin Cronce
2015-06-12  9:08 ` Sebastian Moeller
2015-06-12 15:33   ` Benjamin Cronce
2015-06-12 17:51     ` Sebastian Moeller
2015-06-12 18:44       ` Benjamin Cronce
2015-06-12 18:51   ` Alex Elsayed [this message]
2015-06-12 19:14     ` Jonathan Morton
2015-06-12 19:54       ` Sebastian Moeller
2015-06-12 21:19         ` Benjamin Cronce
2015-06-12 19:21     ` Sebastian Moeller
2015-06-12 22:56       ` Alex Elsayed
2015-06-13  7:13         ` Sebastian Moeller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='mlf9o8$tl3$1@ger.gmane.org' \
    --to=eternaleye@gmail.com \
    --cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox