From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:7028]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 827C23CB40; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 12:09:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from dancer.taht.net (unknown [IPv6:2603:3024:1536:86f0:eea8:6bff:fefe:9a2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 941D322281; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 17:09:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Dave Taht To: Luca Muscariello Cc: Dave Taht , Cake List , AQM IETF list , bloat References: Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 09:09:36 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Luca Muscariello's message of "Thu, 13 Dec 2018 10:51:17 +0100") Message-ID: <87sgyyg1in.fsf@taht.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] [Bloat] paper: per flow fairness in a data center network X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 17:09:54 -0000 Luca Muscariello writes: > I disagree on the claims that DC switches do not implement anything. > They do, from quite some time now. > > https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/nexus-9000-ser= ies-switches/white-paper-c11-738488.html I'm really impressed. I'd have probably heard about it if they'd mentioned bufferbloat once :/. The graphs comparing their performance to arista's are far, far, far too small to read. You can certainly see a huge improvement on mice in this paper. is there a better copy of this paper around? What's the cheapest form of this switch I can buy? (or beg, borrow, or steal?) I do need a 10GigE-40GigE capable switch in the lab, and BOY oh boy oh boy would I love to test this one. Has this tech made it into their routing products? > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:19 AM Dave Taht wrote: > > While I strongly agree with their premise: >=20=20=20=20=20 > "Multi-tenant DCNs cannot rely on specialized protocols and > mechanisms > that assume single ownership and end-system compliance. It is > necessary rather to implement general, well-understood mechanisms > provided as a network service that require as few assumptions > about DC > workload as possible." >=20=20=20=20=20 > ... And there's a solid set of links to current work, and a very > interesting comparison to pfabric, their DCTCP emulation is too > flawed > to be convincing, and we really should get around to making the > ns2 > fq_codel emulation fully match reality. This is also a scenario > where > I'd like to see cake tried, to demonstrate the effectiveness (or > not!) > of 8 way set associative queuing, cobalt, per host/per flow fq, > etc, > vs some of the workloads they outline. >=20=20=20=20=20 > https://perso.telecom-paristech.fr/drossi/paper/rossi18hpsr.pdf >=20=20=20=20=20 > --=20 >=20=20=20=20=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht > CTO, TekLibre, LLC > http://www.teklibre.com > Tel: 1-831-205-9740 > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake >=20=20=20=20=20 > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat