From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (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 C70FE3B29E; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 06:58:18 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1634727492; bh=ehfauzEAwpgID59tbs5kKM4AFJrfUhGSvQ68EvjrxAg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=HH6FfsefQv1CFQrTlmswWGuc6/C91NJD8hTPF8m4UrTC3jjyQTUJzxqmmuGe5w2oT +Zr3NMY6l2ZZgRB/vR4Sl4BS743NxGp/PpBbk+ejOChLPTU+aCLJBS6irRlzSb7JXv g4Fqb3rn9KmwTxlPPhmfgwjoYYwQlCutoYmeKluE= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [192.168.250.101] ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MLzBj-1mLCuD19bl-00HtNr; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:58:12 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:58:11 +0200 Cc: Make-Wifi-fast , Rpm , Keith Winstein Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:G8FWpK2CrF8oe50j2O9/2bZkmNpVztw4BfbB9McMDWHEknP+ae4 Xpm4gwh4f8qkqa/e4D88QmIEYbD1lRh3p300SOQJIaQtM476ZaZXec3lwYrUOCmS7fMQJum SsysxywUulqDftG6zHZVthTl0SOo+mM/N82Ut4XPe4wZdoGRoOcbowBeRPrnTRK5P5EP3NJ bfyNbj7CUGcgJVJ87JW9w== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:+W5wTTwcxhg=:3IxWQ9UK0P+v/H0qHp405R jZ7ig19w4zeuIPYe33KRWc1IsAXXXZ33+TdEzvTmqWSZfxJeDDPhV6TiAljYBZEarGY24MnqX XIVuuyUC0YHvaAM/INKEsamvqHXkw7eJbJWOynuTWDcD900WYN3a7Yaz5ImUEKnxx3m4EXMOE nqwfV8+F4WBIAUl/O+zptN4s1KTqLMOMZIm3YYMntXaZKTPQYxmfX/h66qvWRUwEsGBY4a/I3 VGi10Ji6EPfTjkgpjpw9vUiSX2EqgmC4caIRV3T7xZl+BMp4qTIzT1UqgA0Z+2RU2M2MUFhoR UayP3ABLqpXUu1TV7kMnOmEV5cl5WZEtS5jacNDo5pGBRfHbI7MEdyKg28mEJ37Ic5sSytK5o sTbUg2Q4yDQ0q+R7kh9k50FGOwzRw2/k1olpWIMLL/9+y4OZc//oH1h7VXDDYnFyl2LumksFL ZCShfQahxgNWqJSqAzISzL7uIaqjFHbMKjErmj1rT08v2yzvqKljiskshlxJ97ROURnnqEGpW USZ4XO+tQrtgJLHBu9iQoJ2DdN59AYNsZ+vD7dG61NEmhqPb1G7L+zarIwriqjYe8bqEbeT3W W71Vjk2n21b0W1wNq4AvcAIswpZ+xcyu7XoYSj6HAynLgo8Dm6i9IE2Ky0SbVtQgHJN1xvoZx DDYiSECmyZ2eYISDghgyOExVxGb05nptdooFXbNpz6WhOBh9Go62n1YFdSUbIhUquZolP6jj0 grinEBOVb0A6c3XO+ZNrgNetpgnUSuEPlXYXVJh0HPuoNVYDgVMkd/ILbY2dAuDmpRK09N50u XYwU/Jo+uhqfjYZO6DxSfDPo2MNGzDg07Oy2Msr+MO7pw1o6NYddvt9GBAjB0yztXRHaBHcKE DiNstxhwKYglZhsul1YOqTZCD+L9qxtMcswleb1AGszwCIybN3pkivF8Xv6AjGR+z1ReUOkl2 8BPP4as529aJe5NPRUHZLMKszNlkhPOu57Ma4d+ZTVJe3ea3sCC+UMEOEKkE1qa4Wb8NR6+wT 2Y0hmPmfq2c4QGjeP2GRASiSHftAMh7CuIKyQ8+RX5yj2QWcUPA6gQ5cN5wZftVz/YS5ueiOf ckn8fczCG8Fg0k= Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Rpm] tack - reducing acks on wlans X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 10:58:19 -0000 Just reading the introduction: "It is well-studied that medium acquisition overhead in WLAN based on = the IEEE 802.11 medium access control (MAC) protocol [11] can severely = hamper TCP throughput, and TCP=E2=80=99s many small ACKs are one reason = [53, 69]. Basically, TCP sends an ACK for every one or two packets = (i.e., received-packet-driven) [7, 15]. ACKs share the same medium route = with data packets, causing similar medium access overhead despite the = much smaller size of the ACK- s [8, 31, 36, 50, 58]. Contentions and = collisions, as well as the wasted wireless resources by ACKs, lead to = significant throughput decline on the data path (see =C2=A73.2)." makes me wonder whether the proper solution would not be to exchange the = WiFi MAC with something that is actually suited for existing traffic = patterns....=20 On the other hand the Reno-ACK scheme is probably not really optimal = today (if it ever was in the past) so improving transport-level = feed-back schemes seems a worthy goal in itself. But really, a packet network should be able to simply transport all = packets reasonably efficiently..., no? Regards Sebastian > On Oct 19, 2021, at 22:12, Dave Taht via Rpm = wrote: >=20 > Somehow I'd missed this paper... thx for the steer, keith. >=20 > https://cs.stanford.edu/~keithw/tack-sigcomm2020.pdf >=20 > --=20 > Fixing Starlink's Latencies: = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dc9gLo6Xrwgw >=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > _______________________________________________ > Rpm mailing list > Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm