[Bloat] [Ecn-sane] [iccrg] Fwd: [tcpPrague] Implementation and experimentation of TCP Prague/L4S hackaton at IETF104

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen toke at toke.dk
Sun Mar 17 17:51:31 EDT 2019

Luca Muscariello <luca.muscariello at gmail.com> writes:

> 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’m 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’ll never create the incentives to make progress.



More information about the Bloat mailing list