From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (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 7937D3CB36 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 18:50:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1553467815; bh=Tp+7KJjp8pgbCavkSCdr36U50iYfTiLnvyLAvRIhpBE=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:Subject:Date:To; b=NbyOUqZrscj45pr+Rt4kv2rz68LVBG2gd1P1cUYVAYODN/e/UWeCScWTiDYJQJoUj JS8nxfhjTCZzfD+nF4+XFseMOEUL3IHppriHN+gFDar85H+U4QA1eQjxrN9FIQpSY+ gYzPMx63GXPGEUyb4hN2oj6ba3XO6ilmGhlKvArI= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from hms-beagle2.lan ([77.179.191.128]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MDFB2-1hBXSN19jw-00GcTD for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:50:15 +0100 From: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Message-Id: <3E9C6E74-E335-472B-8745-6020F7CDBA01@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:50:14 +0100 To: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:poplbEU2Oe12Sz6zmBOxYrt0N/4o4WxMlWHKqER/GEAP2YZVHer x66eVqdC1NANP4hBUKPr4e9P+raMPWLi7Uc1N/FgL98sJrmNMd8644dpH6iNJXsoX4qDymj 6EphJUHJlIsTKb2P+f43GWb99m9VWUX66f5qrXsK/Pfkuj605YLhO88Ob0vlaNbhLKwSXWp VBqEfQ+CL2FuPTlvSD7SQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:vGn1EHf3AGE=:GcDS2JXdl6AHQMQI952HDj 2J4QGG4Z1GNX7NpBQM0p3PK9kKFQv0s5JewKZbZItPBvWo6LPLI110jM2aP/63VOMnOgj+tHG Co7iuqmwEnHsb/hBK5qtSM30bTDxnNaZ9jQwnpIlgSO/OTllm5owNw/1PKxt4V1VlgLl/uKbG rYW1V/d1l5A5QYfmTZ/Fil+ybA5E7w6ArgP5qtWOce11Qtb27b5F+NfEiJRMgKDC2Nvqfsy+3 asJCNeDPAGPQek1oSCvLeCxfNViPTLdVRVmggv1USBqDxaadq51eu6C+xvG8oU4Ia9U2jJanh eSs7wRttDYeVymm5NzgWVtjU8J1FWnWAB6QHkg9z/p1kv4bruVThFeUaLDbty5tty5wkEezk6 XHUnCXBYyp1M3QPDfDNCCo/LzQq4hbPdnzj/Yf3TqmSVvzoUcGzmiqwsSOuD0xTIgl7Cncevh tmOpKs/TePbTa388FXYWZIsUUyM7nOR8OVGy123+WzvazRk5+LN6m/K8wdeVxA2OFyOgN7Ans YT8LNB/AzcHfp8BsH6MKfpMR/2KOUd7bBKxu0BKUEAQ2ND7r8ePAWqmsQpupR+amuR5DfUh6b NX2btK+lcvNEq2Pt83mkkx132+1hVEA6Xu75zwZ0u8+cHoa5zNDV34zvvhStfmNfD67ZlnG+G GgK0C5YOLU15RgGYF6uXfjEhMHitEVMd/i+NgZRHLPW3Sr+24SklpjVnOhGXCCod7JwEW4sSL vsQe1vhBVxu1uwTOGEkUFocQerT4RUv4ntWcVixLKJlxAZpv19xLM8lHfZH6x34OLrwjmTg1C SpIk1hjYcecQ0r7w0s/sld3iqEkt//7hT80Ifk0wM1jU6LRyc30Qu16ajEaz+a2Ewp27OugMA 6P3TbU5Lk63PDQXTjogoRIagO+P2gjyGGxM39+Oz6GUFcvUYemaLC3Xsy77t49RhrwmuTzxBD zfOmKpneMmQ== Subject: [Ecn-sane] robustness against attack? 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: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 22:50:16 -0000 Here is a comment on the tsvwg mailing list for the [tsvwg] Questions = and comments on draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-06 bt G. Fairhurst: "Section 8. I think there should be some discussion on what happens if = an attacker introduces ECT(1) rogue packets can it influence the method, = other than an attack which seeks to induce congestion? " =46rom my layman's perspective this is the the killer argument against = the dualQ approach and for fair-queueing, IMHO only fq will be able to = (stochastically) isolate rouge flows.... (okay if the attacker = randomizes port numbers he/she will also do considerable harm to an fq = AQM, but at least it will take more than one flow). I might be overly = optimistic about fq and unfairly negative about dualQ/LLLLS, but the = idea of fully trusting the end-points to play fair (as far as I can tell = dualQ wi)ll only tail-drop once it queue passes a configured threshold) = seems overly optimistic to me. This reminds on of the difference between = cooperative and preemptive multitasking, while the former has the = potential for higher performance, all general purposes OS went for the = latter... Anyway, since I am far away from this field I would not be = amazed if I would just re-hash old arguments here, but still a thought = is a thought, and uttering even a silly thought can result in me = learning something ;) Best Regards Sebastian