From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1C9C3B2A4 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2019 08:24:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id x25so6007263ljh.2 for ; Thu, 04 Jul 2019 05:24:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=PG5jC/+ThcvoUh7v8kHxSTpGJ0N8dDdr9y4ZNNW+CKs=; b=qxlKYW8dcHTHIk3r1/srLnZTEUca8y/kl8kvi8O/skmgBap+74/Z/8l6IIr5IDy3sU tb4dQINbLeDxnABiKzmfeZ7hdxK7RFn2O9BIZzuTFl8rjFfW9EQYAdq8U/mKqEX9mLsl TRlucsxwjeSXzOcT6KkvPIf0rrghQiDgAw4rxj6nirfwX+NZZOdr/58P/eatMbHUntMV xFV6aMaGMUqlSO9dq5coJ+b/9+UCPKTqaJ9GRH7zT6msH+jtS0bea53OmUNJHuJX/Fan aNV+pJ+Wht5jxW2EYR2L0eE6E0iwc0ehzZ6grs87Tms+VoTzfKkWA1/aKzIFSIjezwGS BNcQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=PG5jC/+ThcvoUh7v8kHxSTpGJ0N8dDdr9y4ZNNW+CKs=; b=JUY2ikgGY+VplfcXTgRYJawKar7RDddIEeVlWW0rwgxhyHJcJ3hrdWGpJZiMTFZ2Wa ZAqWgsL29Zr9BDYHFKSBQfto83ColGJzs/GzGQOEqckwcL8yVmh8j76VjfwGHRoKmN62 yVy9hc7Rlr/76y2QYO7MWZljWIL2RJigTuqbfOoVOPZ0gY9fJ/SMQ6IN4g1u4a/yMK4r ZByUE34+0Sm2gymjXlIbVUKKIQTunqUfPV9d5cgGsb6Oj2Y89hyz1xr5B7zlbsbXb3x1 X3CvLODG5ndgInPoZ3Y3ySuHOCwJrIigDw3ebw53ACMQOAbtZhz/9ocIbFf7evblmNpl XPkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU7IxJqLvZRJmBQFAsVOPt97l/QbIkIa2Q6h5TH4eUA/0M6qziE 9cik7giS3gwx2A8lkk0klHM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwwYvFtOzAvGOcllhQWthsP8dq1ysf2JyNxYIHh2nFQIqyZynHJmbPE5GLIcemQX8rQt80Q3Q== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:63cd:: with SMTP id s74mr24381985lje.164.1562243060837; Thu, 04 Jul 2019 05:24:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (83-245-232-91-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.232.91]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 24sm1234007ljs.63.2019.07.04.05.24.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Jul 2019 05:24:20 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 15:24:18 +0300 Cc: Luca Muscariello , "Holland, Jake" , "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" , "tsvwg@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1238A446-6E05-4A55-8B3B-878C8F39FC75@gmail.com> References: <364514D5-07F2-4388-A2CD-35ED1AE38405@akamai.com> <4aff6353-eb0d-b0b8-942d-9c92753f074e@bobbriscoe.net> To: Bob Briscoe X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] [tsvwg] Comments on L4S drafts X-BeenThere: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of explicit congestion notification's impact on the Internet List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 12:24:22 -0000 > On 4 Jul, 2019, at 2:54 pm, Bob Briscoe wrote: >=20 > The phrase "relative to a FIFO" is important. In a FIFO, it is of = course possible for flows to take more throughput than others. We see = that as a feature of the Internet not a bug. But we accept that some = might disagree... Chalk me up as among those who consider "no worse than a FIFO" to not be = very reassuring. As is well documented and even admitted in L4S drafts, = L4S flows tend to squash "classic" flows in a FIFO. So the difficulty here is twofold: 1: DualQ or FQ is needed to make L4S coexist with existing traffic, and 2: DualQ can be defeated by an adversary, destroying its ability to = isolate L4S traffic. I'll read your reply to Jake when it arrives. - Jonathan Morton