From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-wg0-f47.google.com (mail-wg0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
	Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19FF321F0DB
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Fri,  3 Aug 2012 23:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgbfa7 with SMTP id fa7so916818wgb.28
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Fri, 03 Aug 2012 23:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date
	:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=oJ8SvMD4WW6eigUgwVH1XnlTZnoZ+OtG7b8FuG3JQE8=;
	b=R8//edoEwYdGxeuwPWATFleg8Jxic/IvFYCPB5slG7q0hrkIW/tuzTTDulRJtRoMAb
	8Uh/PO+QFdWTxZXSQukuzqnrOVb4S13DupUTg0+kjolFnVoYJKwyFGx+FgLbodz+Q3Hj
	tuotrlTlQ77WA7F1M6kC6klliUVQsryLXth86/Vr5k7Nq/oKrYwVF/xRqhkJJU/6usEM
	lDLQK5BwjncQyH26H8jXSHDB/zMO/h+/xhXSSrHeAAcCQfuGFgR+rYtMY2JgPt0QOUXm
	KvqWYaj4SrZApZ4yVAWMPL7/bGNQBZKvhUeu5hDkWUZLkxyk2lUXNLk1nxtIRT/IxIrG
	+Urw==
Received: by 10.180.103.136 with SMTP id fw8mr2311672wib.20.1344062741719;
	Fri, 03 Aug 2012 23:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.30.42.18] (171.237.66.86.rev.sfr.net. [86.66.237.171])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dc3sm1397304wib.7.2012.08.03.23.45.39
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 03 Aug 2012 23:45:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Dave =?ISO-8859-1?Q?T=E4ht?= <dave.taht@bufferbloat.net>
In-Reply-To: <1344048299-26267-1-git-send-email-dave.taht@bufferbloat.net>
References: <1344048299-26267-1-git-send-email-dave.taht@bufferbloat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2012 08:45:38 +0200
Message-ID: <1344062738.9299.1453.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Codel] [RFC PATCH] codel: ecn mark at target
X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions <codel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/codel>,
	<mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/codel>
List-Post: <mailto:codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel>,
	<mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2012 06:45:44 -0000

On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 19:44 -0700, Dave Täht wrote:
> From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@bufferbloat.net>
> 
> The consensus at ietf was that ecn marking should start at
> target, and then the results fed into the codel drop scheduler.
> 
> While I agree with the latter, I feel that waiting an interval
> before starting to mark will be more in-tune with the concept
> of a sojourn time, and lead to better utilization.
> 
> As I am outnumbered and outgunned, do it at target.

Well, thats a huge way to favor non ECN flows against ECN flows.

Marking _all_ ECN enabled packets just because last packet sent had a
sojourn time above target is going to throttle ECN flows and let non ECN
flows going full speed and take whole bandwidth.

Doing so is a nice way to keep users switching to ECN one day.

IETF could just say : ECN is doomed, forget about it, dont even try.