From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (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 B327B3CB37 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:14:28 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1565180064; bh=RTbt2kDBv5VfHGG43j4AMJWLKTVqCNOF2rgqtYUZWHM=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=b5TK/vHxgFOee2FK3jT99eTNwpwCBj8cRZq4+c43ITAlCFp22fyTGNWsb6ugHu8AR BQHppd7UnmGpCNi1scURuGG5ll0mccemACDcUe5o4MpsUTGZikx2WHK08fGNoF9jwt BMx61itVTYXpsKG2P2c/U3uhsZWq6fp09WfxkrAA= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [10.11.12.32] ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LreCz-1iKkZR2Ttt-013Quc; Wed, 07 Aug 2019 14:14:24 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 14:14:22 +0200 Cc: Jeremy Harris , ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: 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> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:/1GznWHHYEpVwjLXjfQX3cMyjL1/CiQaHjU9Bk6q6yl+La1nt32 GhSKRYjoZo9zXyPLaGLQbYob4e7IensjyGa4XHyCU+Ek/wXjQlBEZOyxMKBYLo90RR8E1Sg iKhCmDPU/yKt52sh1x+QoigYyWvkx6oYx/Dps/suDFWvy3Q2ibwpCQWAZG7IMZ9oCGKpaJr J30pC3IO7jKN1JeJPohLg== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:kM7UezDspg8=:apl19wnvMZaLCiLWN1qKii lImEE1Wiv8c+CeXfJj+euELPb+IMgtHC5eNPID39jt+JMJYqlTaRuofI+R83rVLVPGJ/oYjUL HICmC2L/NPkVGnLa6eij919i5Eff36NcRH67jitXxTuwp3ZAf6aH0z1tMjFuaN5vsH3ljTD7B ZsQDQmnapa7EeDafbJwNaCUr4N7dg0r5md8Ee3ST5PIyMZVl7Il0ORmui7v1Am0XGmAKF3MlX jcvQckW5/vkoNd4GJZka0q1yEw/7ktH7W5i9vM6WKy4n8KltDC0uwnTAqtcrPwTD4ETfVappQ LwiB3l14s6ctTKTDTObZT9CWHG/D9TQ4oHi9px+1ZCpjy2TViKLkqGG6xFfvhjbXL2YV7YsY0 IuNTVG7mRx6DmWcc9Ru52ks+B/j+WIz+9pMAV1IHtfV8sP0D3aIaXLdMfCnjMYBpzuWeqS7e6 IQjK/ArcipwN5MLtYn99o4UMy+1cuQ7ee6qKaGvJbsnUvM1cpLXRZHuhu53p4yEUdJAKJ47eW Fpze/dFFZ6mEgaE49GIPDeDgmZXqdzEBtqyyCcmevCV+Wn2VBj5ImzmSz4F4Uz9MxkRZ9Whz+ d5kAVM3n12wILvHb3haOkKZT1WibrAZ4DDRt8IRHCux78qii4tAQUBSWDrYvLt+bgD4BuElNy H+9hPVrGIqDTcIPDESxzPUxIu8NhVOQUyMoUXFr8QmZhuGcphPQMI/0DYHSFr4z6YoYxPGCiu Q7So+nrXc+Tt8Asx6/NHCLWjjWDh0BBXNGz9ph0r3nf3r9NL4KKdV0iEjeFI3udnYYjsw5iMz lHhCG5pJ8zGqv8QuzYZ+VG6Kc/fx9AiVr/qLZsQa0mfKzf1phpSycpQvbKEqZ7+VcJDiVbRng 6POwqhk2YDNDuEXLXTPKPx0Aq2CNdkB/YWcmaptv4rY0N5tG6U8VwLf8BeBz5XyKPYfczvpKV JP9xkDdQwdU6yOxVHDYKxkToE1MO034O+15nVgr77skHauo9WbBs2MPZFqKD/yI4xYPRwIAWe /gpgYzc32fdyhiKUXrLC/1s1zCfuVZYtL8AaUAk+YDiZe1zvg+JkPl4jeqitYgUFbsgOtluXF XVS/nMQmcMfhBx0Rz6n8KPWhOILN7e8uqpr6VPKRU4WNh1CcjJY3CHRfb0s1tdBeMG8WszXmW rThCY= 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 12:14:29 -0000 > On Aug 7, 2019, at 14:03, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >=20 > On Wed, 7 Aug 2019, Jeremy Harris wrote: >=20 >> (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. >=20 > 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 guess I am overly naive, but as far as I can tell only TCP has = this strong shuffling-sensitivity, UDP itself does not care = (applications still might dislike packet shuffling). Could the = intermediate hops not simply block TCP and just pass on UDP? This should = at least avoid the medium idling while waiting for the straggling = packets. I guess that is tricky in that a medium's ARQ might not look = past its own headers, "sequence identifiers" and checksums, clearly that = is not enough to get to the protocol ID (add to this IPv6 extension = headers and the required deep dive). The fact that is not implemented yet, indicates to me that the ECT(1) = thing is also not likely to make more inroads, what am I missing? Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > --=20 > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > Ecn-sane mailing list > Ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/ecn-sane