From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
To: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>,
"Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>,
"cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] DOCSIS 3+ recommendation?
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 17:29:00 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1503201725360.22474@nftneq.ynat.uz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46B196A4-7755-4275-99E8-3D259EB46C33@ifi.uio.no>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 4067 bytes --]
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Michael Welzl wrote:
>> On 21. mar. 2015, at 01.03, David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2015, Michael Welzl wrote:
>>
>>>> On 20. mar. 2015, at 17.31, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 20 Mar, 2015, at 16:54, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>>>>> I'd like people to understand that packet loss often also comes with delay - for having to retransmit.
>>>> Or, turning it upside down, it’s always a win to drop packets (in the service of signalling congestion) if the induced delay exceeds the inherent RTT.
>>>
>>> Actually, no: as I said, the delay caused by a dropped packet can be more than 1 RTT - even much more under some circumstances. Consider this quote from the intro of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe-01 :
>>
>> You are viewing this as a question to drop a packet or not drop a packet.
>>
>> The problem is that isn't the actual question.
>>
>> The question is to drop a packet early and have the sender slow down, or wait
>> until the sender has filled the buffer to the point that all traffic
>> (including acks) is experiencing multi-second latency and then drop a bunch
>> of packets.
>>
>> In theory ECN would allow for feedback to the sender to have it slow down
>> without any packet being dropped, but in the real world it doesn't work that
>> well.
>
> I think it's about time we finally turn it on in the real world.
>
>
>> 1. If you mark packets as congested if they have ECN and drop them if they
>> don't, programmers will mark everything ECN (and not slow transmission)
>> because doing so gives them an advantage over applications that don't mark
>> their packets with ECN
>
> I heard this before but don't buy this as being a significant problem (and
> haven't seen evidence thereof either). Getting more queue space and
> occasionally getting a packet through that others don't isn't that much of an
> advantage - it comes at the cost of latency for your own application too
> unless you react to congestion.
but the router will still be working to reduce traffic, so more non-ECN flows
will get packets dropped to reduce the
loadhttp://email.chase.com/10385c493layfousub74lnvqaaaaaahg7lbwdgdvonyyaaaaa/C?V=emlwX2NvZGUBAUNVU1RfTEFTVF9OTQFMQU5HAVJFV0FSRFNfQkF
MQU5DRQExNi43MwFnX2luZGV4AQFDVVNUX0ZJUlNUX05NAURBVklEAUxBU1RfNAE1NDE3AWxfaW5kZXgBAXByb2ZpbGVfaWQBNDg0Mzk5MjEyAW1haWxpbmdfaWQBMTE
0OTI5NTU5AV9XQVZFX0lEXwE4NTY2MDAxNzQBX1BMSVNUX0lEXwExNjgwMTYwMQFVTlFfRU5STF9DRAEyMTEyMzkzOTE1AWVtYWlsX2FkX2lkAQFMU1RfU1RNVF9EQVR
FATAyLzAxLzE1AWVtYWlsX2FkZHIBZGF2aWRAbGFuZy5obQFfU0NIRF9UTV8BMjAxNTAzMjAyMTAwMDABcHJvZmlsZV9rZXkBQTE0NjQ3MjgxMTQ%3D&KwXv5L3yGN8q
uPM67mqc0Q
>
>> marking packets with ECN gives an advantage to them in mixed environments
>>
>> 2. If you mark packets as congested at a lower level than where you drop
>> them, no programmer is going to enable ECN because flows with ECN will be
>> prioritized below flows without ECN
>
> Well.... longer story. Let me just say that marking where you would otherwise
> drop would be fine as a starting point. You don't HAVE to mark lower than
> you'd drop.
>
>
>> If everyone use ECN you don't have a problem, but if only some
>> users/applications do, there's no way to make it equal, so one or the other
>> is going to have an advantage, programmers will game the system to do
>> whatever gives them the advantage
>
> I don't buy this at all. Game to gain what advantage? Anyway I can be more
> aggressive than everyone else if I want to, by backing off less, or not
> backing off at all, with or without ECN. Setting ECN-capable lets me do this
> with also getting a few more packets through without dropping - but packets
> get dropped at the hard queue limit anyway. So what's the big deal? What is
> the major gain that can be gained over others?
for gamers, even a small gain can be major. Don't forget that there's also the
perceived advantage "If I do this, everyone else's packets will be dropped and
mine will get through, WIN!!!"
David Lang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-21 0:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-16 20:35 [Cerowrt-devel] " Matt Taggart
2015-03-17 23:32 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2015-03-18 4:34 ` David P. Reed
2015-03-18 6:26 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-18 19:38 ` JF Tremblay
2015-03-18 19:50 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-19 13:53 ` dpreed
2015-03-19 14:11 ` JF Tremblay
2015-03-19 15:38 ` dpreed
2015-03-19 15:40 ` Jim Gettys
2015-03-19 17:04 ` Michael Richardson
2015-03-19 17:14 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-19 17:11 ` Dave Taht
2015-03-19 19:58 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] " Livingood, Jason
2015-03-19 20:29 ` dpreed
2015-03-19 23:18 ` Greg White
2015-03-20 8:18 ` MUSCARIELLO Luca IMT/OLN
2015-03-20 13:31 ` David P. Reed
2015-03-20 13:46 ` Sebastian Moeller
2015-03-20 14:05 ` MUSCARIELLO Luca IMT/OLN
2015-03-20 10:07 ` Sebastian Moeller
2015-03-20 13:50 ` [Cerowrt-devel] Latency Measurements in Speed Test suites (was: DOCSIS 3+ recommendation?) Rich Brown
2015-03-29 17:36 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] " Pedro Tumusok
2015-03-30 7:06 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-20 13:57 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] DOCSIS 3+ recommendation? Livingood, Jason
2015-03-20 14:08 ` David P. Reed
2015-03-20 14:14 ` MUSCARIELLO Luca IMT/OLN
2015-03-20 14:48 ` Matt Mathis
2015-03-20 18:04 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2015-03-20 13:48 ` Jim Gettys
2015-03-20 14:11 ` Livingood, Jason
2015-03-20 14:54 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-20 15:31 ` Jim Gettys
2015-03-20 15:39 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-20 16:31 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-20 20:59 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-20 23:47 ` David P. Reed
2015-03-21 0:08 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-21 0:03 ` David Lang
2015-03-21 0:13 ` Steinar H. Gunderson
2015-03-21 0:25 ` David Lang
2015-03-21 0:34 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-21 0:38 ` David Lang
2015-03-21 0:43 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-22 4:15 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-21 0:15 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-21 0:29 ` David Lang [this message]
2015-03-22 4:10 ` Michael Welzl
2015-03-20 18:14 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-03-18 8:06 ` [Cerowrt-devel] " 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/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.02.1503201725360.22474@nftneq.ynat.uz \
--to=david@lang.hm \
--cc=Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=michawe@ifi.uio.no \
/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