Re: [Ecn-sane] robustness against attack?

[Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, Jonathan Morton wrote:

>> On 25 Mar, 2019, at 8:16 am, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
>>
>> Do people on this email list think we're trying to trick you when we're saying that FQ won't be available anytime soon on a lot of platforms that need this kind of AQM?
>
> Well, I don't.  I recognise that most high-capacity links will end up 
> with single-queue AQM, because that's what's already out there in 
> hardware (though it's rarely turned on so far).  I'm still keen to see 
> good FQ used where feasible, and in ways that make local sense.

Ok, so can we please drop the "FQ" part of the conversation for the next 
months, and argue on few-queue systems and how to come up with things that 
are friendly to implement in hardware?

Just to state again what I have said several times:

Devices such as high speed residential gateways, BNGs, CMTSs etc, they 
will not get FQ anytime in the next 5-10 years (or someone will have to 
prove me wrong).

So please stop arguing about the wonderfulness of FQ. Yes, fine, it's 
great, but it's also not applicable to lots of places where we need to 
de-bloat.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se