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

Greg White g.white at CableLabs.com
Tue Mar 19 01:52:02 EDT 2019



´╗┐On 3/18/19, 11:35 PM, "Jonathan Morton" <chromatix99 at gmail.com> wrote:

    From my standpoint, the major objection to L4S is that it is not incrementally deployable, because DCTCP starves conventional TCPs unless run through an isolated queue.  This is something we quickly realised when L4S was first announced.  It is simply not practical to require all middleboxes on the path to support L4S before L4S endpoints can safely be deployed, except in the isolated and very controlled environments where DCTCP was "proved".
    
[GW] But this isn't true!    L4S utilizes TCP Prague, which falls back to traditional congestion control if the bottleneck link doesn't provide isolation.  



More information about the Bloat mailing list