From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C46273CB37 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:34:35 -0400 (EDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1565181275; b=KVbKfGR2DpZPxcdzZG4lOobeA8YlfhwYr6dN+rGA4WiNWSNH5+vaxKTitXgc0sUfF4AELHSDbJ a3a706Pn7RGxM6nO+fZFYXJILiyvIy0fnS9Ep2JE8Ye6AdEPkJgltM47IVdrQtH11PikICnZj/ TIR3lFtahZap3WuP97W0gZE=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.remote-ip=2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1565181275; bh=HRg1jXAPM4qplZV5rEtBqiAFivWsSF+2/tuDwqJbqh0=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=LBh1gPysuUX3ixh/jzVu9KVysbBlAHTwAHqpqfXKDm92Z2AP13z6L9pNihIRjtfpqQ3vESjCoU TH+x9DursChlgUhvDYAnQBUS7/857GdM0BE7kxClOUopSTP33dSRTNL8lg+ihCimWhE9fcIC9+ lK1xzJ8UQ9aZGnJkGbbeluY=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=xNAbeASY2pxTJbxTM639e0jHiuTXDB4Z8K9zYpneSBA=; b=y 2re0nvhzCbj743iOwy2SYfkwyv6CbJiIWARCECV/1bxOEtHamAkOJOdnCLb6rwHLl+an0RfNYxv3z wpSvVo1TtAT8/ULKO2lT8NmDRIOn2CZffexUNxd3UEO0wg+v4/HiSJr+2fjSVo1VtsCpq9nmA6Mv8 omwkVUbXGZWuFkVw=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.remote-ip=2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from [2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94] (helo=lap.dom.ain) by wizmail.org (Exim 4.92.125) (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) with esmtpsa id 1hvL9G-0007jk-Iv for ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net (return-path ); Wed, 07 Aug 2019 12:34:34 +0000 To: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <364514D5-07F2-4388-A2CD-35ED1AE38405@akamai.com> <4B02593C-E67F-4587-8B7E-9127D029AED9@gmx.de> <34e3b1b0-3c4c-bb6a-82c1-89ac14d5fd2c@bobbriscoe.net> <77522c07-6f2e-2491-ba0e-cbef62aad194@bobbriscoe.net> <619092c0-640f-56c2-19c9-1cc486180c8b@bobbriscoe.net> <3A454B00-AEBC-48B6-9A8A-922C66E884A7@gmx.de> <21E40F44-2151-4565-970E-E1CEBE975036@gmx.de> <58F8052E-A56B-4E1F-8E1D-CBE75A0F7332@akamai.com> <9C42D7E8-734A-4620-B95B-5FFDDF1D3D95@gmail.com> From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAG0JkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+iQE7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGuQENBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAGJAR8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: <80f8c4b0-02d8-9dd6-dcae-58d641497f23@wizmail.org> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:34:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] [tsvwg] Compatibility with singlw queue RFC3168 AQMs 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: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 12:34:35 -0000 On 07/08/2019 13:03, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Wed, 7 Aug 2019, Jeremy Harris wrote: > >> (assuming TCP SACK in use).  But the socket interface would need >> to present sequencing information along with the segments; it being >> no longer implied by the sequence of satisfied reads. > > Yes, the socket stream interface guarantees ordered delivery of that > stream. That doesn't mean other 5 tuple connections running over the > same media need to be held up just because a packet is missing from this > first stream. A lot of medias guarantees complete ordering, even between > flows/streams. If we loosen this requirement then muxed transports or > other stream can continue even if there is a packet missing and being > ARQed on the media. I can't quite tell if you're noting that transports need to be aware of, and handle (in one way or another) packets re-ordered by lower layers [ I thought this was a given, already ] or that link-layers Should Not enforce ordered delivery of frames [ i.e. Wifi and, I think, mobile phone providers are doing it all wrong. And half of the work being talked about in the LOOPS group is suspect]. The latter sounds somewhat like the end-to-end principle. -- Cheers, Jeremy