From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot1-x32f.google.com (mail-ot1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32f]) (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 2308C3B2A4; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 16:50:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id q24so12734550otk.0; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 13:50:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VYGxKPGMeLTmFWtucocKdldxiMtTTHuVlakrB3v9Cuo=; b=YP+w1DZF2cpgAoi6HlzfNsbUmMiCmlcm3oXsx5FMkrb3UAYfZ9J/O2qDcBU6Gi32oq ttDM3ez2acga1GxLZlYqjykCFhIy3mFtLsyYR+BNFzOFYbqmTT/Ev4vQufQwR62VzJ7A sVGQvZH7d1p4zmJcE1EUCXEu6VZz3jZhy1dIAAkUQa9OlLq32JxRdWxE2sS0YCuAqHJA VcfVZ35oq0aLGmyANV+ojjI+6JTpn8m741E9I6QuiCnkDfxehpMaQD/tFdyXwROMm1vp gz1Jn8lWzRy0tb5FLjuNg1UAy4IDf3uceQIS+X0l3fvOI/sZ9iXEYls6DiPGfwgPcX1o ZFwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VYGxKPGMeLTmFWtucocKdldxiMtTTHuVlakrB3v9Cuo=; b=rpa+yU4vhSPXc/uZDF+is0rfDS6qZPVwHsY+DkPIZ1U3B1YyT4LDaXN6M7u8X0UPTI 2bVhURJbAtsj7HwQ+Dq3RIKoAtdw2UX9EIC3tgb/0fONyEFH4ocHZPn3oqxYawdC03qw BXMjXcRIMk9eUu2Xd75+xwqPzyf/blyhGP7DxJ1BaXEpPm+A+DtXEK3g7OU0QkDz/F57 XpOYcc0w6vGqbaDalHJiI1pVkQn35UN9w3PKS31fzHDtFeEoM5QpnmJwEug0314Qf6Bq BfYYCk5ACoE+8VRpDhWcw6NsDXRX62Tn7mFof9LUkYngn9ky5evr7pooJkWC51L29ZJ8 jRdw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXzw/HjzbTlY8HF6nWVqQ9fabbxjzXYrC2jFEGL7wmZbf4XNYuQ oc4bG1Kj3bkyU2gKz8oTa5GWbzWG1iD7MpD34pgPe1Tv X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqys2MX5+CnzEECIPBrJ6WUutN81dLQhBHRw1gGEltWk3Espje2MTp1K7oZxdmNBFJ/7RhYh6t3ywJ5DIGqRmhc= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5c09:: with SMTP id o9mr8996558otk.128.1552855837239; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 13:50:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1E80578D-A589-4CA0-9015-B03B63042355@gmx.de> <27FA673A-2C4C-4652-943F-33FAA1CF1E83@gmx.de> <1552669283.555112988@apps.rackspace.com> <7029DA80-8B83-4775-8261-A4ADD2CF34C7@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: From: Luca Muscariello Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 21:50:26 +0100 Message-ID: To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: "David P. Reed" , "Holland, Jake" , bloat , "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000090eee00584506c1f" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 17:05:08 -0400 Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] [Bloat] [iccrg] Fwd: [tcpPrague] Implementation and experimentation of TCP Prague/L4S hackaton at IETF104 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, 17 Mar 2019 20:50:38 -0000 --00000000000090eee00584506c1f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To me there is substantial difference from something like fq_codel or fq_pie where service differentiation is largely implicit and approches largely based on explicit marking. Approaches based on marking face technical and non technical challenges that have been largely mentioned in these lists. Fq_codel has a ton of litterature behind both theoretical and experimental and it is something very close to optimality, in terms of completion time and latency. Fq_codel also incentivizes the development of better congestion control as the reward is immediate. It also makes Internet performance predictable. Once we know that, the logical approach would be to try to approximate that thing when the full mechanism is not possible because of a variety of limitations. This is the case in some DC switches that implement AFD+priority fair queueing at 40Gbps. Fq_codel has an outstanding footprint in terms of deployment. Iliad deployed SFQ in 2005 nation wide and Fq_codel as soon as it was available in France and is the second largest ISP. Iliad/Free controls the development of both the home GW and the DSLAM. They have recently started to commercialize 10Gbps to the home using switched Ethernet. I=E2=80=99m very tempted to test it. Kudos to them for being able to prove it is possible as long as you control the development of your equipment. A logical next step to me seems to push chipcos to build fq_codel in silicon. It is totally feasible. If on the other hand we say that we can achieve all fq_codel provides with current chipsets we=E2=80=99ll never create the incentives to make progress= . My2c Luca On Sun 17 Mar 2019 at 15:06, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Sat, 16 Mar 2019, Holland, Jake wrote: > > > Granted, it still remains to be seen whether SCE in practice can match > > the results of L4S, and L4S was here first. But it seems to me L4S com= es > > with some problems that have not yet been examined, and that are nicely > > dodged by a SCE-based approach. > > I'm actually not that interested in an academic competition about what > solution gives the ultimate "best" outcome in simulation or in a lab. > > I am interested in good enough solutions that are actually deployable and > will get deployed, and doesn't have any pathological behaviour when it > comes to legacy traffic. > > Right now the Internet is full of deep FIFOs and they're not going away, > and they're not getting FQ_CODEL or CAKE. > > CAKE/FQ_CODEL is nice, but it's not being deployed at the typical > congestion points we have in real life. These devices would have a much > easier time getting PIE or even RED, if it was just implemented. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --00000000000090eee00584506c1f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To me there is substantial difference from something= like fq_codel or fq_pie where service differentiation is largely implicit<= /div>
and approches largely based on explicit markin= g.=C2=A0

Approaches base= d on marking face technical and non technical challenges that have been lar= gely mentioned in these lists.

Fq_codel has a ton of litterature behind both theoretical and experi= mental and it is something very close to optimality, in terms of completion= time and latency.

Fq_co= del also incentivizes the development of better congestion control as the r= eward is immediate. It also makes =C2=A0Internet performance=C2=A0
predictable.

Once we know that, the logical approach would be to try to approximate = that thing when the full mechanism is not possible because of a variety of = limitations.

This is the= case in some DC switches that implement AFD+priority fair queueing at 40Gb= ps.

Fq_codel has an outs= tanding footprint in terms of deployment.
Iliad depl= oyed SFQ in 2005 nation wide and Fq_codel as soon as it was available in Fr= ance and is the second largest ISP.=C2=A0
Iliad/Free= =C2=A0controls the development of both the home GW and the DSLAM.=C2=A0
They have recently started to commercialize 10Gbps to = the home using switched Ethernet.
I=E2=80=99m very t= empted to test it.

Kudos= to them for being able to prove it is possible as long as you control the = development of your equipment.

A logical next step =C2=A0to me seems to push chipcos to build fq_co= del in silicon.
It is totally feasible.=C2=A0
<= div dir=3D"auto">
If on the other hand we say th= at we can achieve all fq_codel provides with current chipsets we=E2=80=99ll= never create the incentives to make progress.

<= /div>
My2c
Luca=C2=A0
On Sun 17= Mar 2019 at 15:06, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019, Holland, Jake wrote:

> Granted, it still remains to be seen whether SCE in practice can match=
> the results of L4S, and L4S was here first.=C2=A0 But it seems to me L= 4S comes
> with some problems that have not yet been examined, and that are nicel= y
> dodged by a SCE-based approach.

I'm actually not that interested in an academic competition about what =
solution gives the ultimate "best" outcome in simulation or in a = lab.

I am interested in good enough solutions that are actually deployable and <= br> will get deployed, and doesn't have any pathological behaviour when it =
comes to legacy traffic.

Right now the Internet is full of deep FIFOs and they're not going away= ,
and they're not getting FQ_CODEL or CAKE.

CAKE/FQ_CODEL is nice, but it's not being deployed at the typical
congestion points we have in real life. These devices would have a much easier time getting PIE or even RED, if it was just implemented.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson=C2=A0 =C2=A0 email: swmike@swm.pp.se
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@list= s.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
--00000000000090eee00584506c1f--