[Bloat] slow start improvement

Sun Dec 31 09:50:14 EST 2023

Thx for getting back to us.

A specific question regarding your AP, is what wifi drivers were on
it? Many (but not enough) have the fq_codel fq+AQM algorithm on it,
notably all the openwrt based mt76, mt79, ath9k, ath10k, I think
ath11k, and iwl, as described in this paper:
https://www.cs.kau.se/tohojo/airtime-fairness/

A feature of this is some ECN support, which if triggered is a sure
fire way to know you have overshot and can back down to 5ms or so
delay.

On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 4:33 AM 李林刚 <linganglee at 126.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Täht:
>
>
>
> Thank you very much for your interest in our work and the valuable advices you gave!
>
>
>
> As described in Part IV.A of the paper, the WiFi in our experiment works in the 2.4GHz band (802.11b/g/n mixed mode with 40/20 MHz bandwidth). In fact, in order to verify that our work works even in lower throughput networks, we also set the WiFi AP to 802.11g only and 802.11b only modes respectively, and the experimental results show that the smaller the available bandwidth of the network, the weaker the acceleration effect of FBE is (due to space constraints we didn't include these data in the paper).
>
>
>
> Regarding your comment that FBE will make dynamics at bottleneck queues even more volatile, in our test results the bandwidth estimated by FBE does not deviate a lot from the real bandwidth and does not seriously disturb the bottleneck queue. In addition, existing congestion control algorithms (e.g. cubic and BBR) usually cause large queues when exiting the slow start phase, while FBE doesn't have a large impact on the queue compared to them.
>
>
>
> As you said, the rwnd selection module is not a good design, but we think that rwnd may could be revisited in the right context for existing receivers that usually have a large receive buffer if we want to speed up the startup process. Therefore, we used it as an advanced design in this paper, but of course this requires more detailed analysis and more careful selection, which is one of the improvements we can consider in the future.
>
>
>
> It is a very good suggestion to test if FBE also works in more network environments, but due to the lack of various test environments, we are mainly testing via WiFi and speedtest public servers right now. If the experimental conditions are available in the future, we will further evaluate FBE as well.
>
>
>
> We couldn't agree more with you that slow-start is very important. It is not that we feel slow-start is not good and we have to modify it, but we think that in the current network scenarios where the available bandwidth is getting larger and larger, slow-start may have room for improvements. Therefore, we come up with our design, and hope that our explorations may be beneficial to the future optimization of the slow start.
>
>
>
> Thank you again for your valuable comments, which have given us a deeper understanding of network optimization and for our future researches. Wishing you a happy new year!
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Li
>
>
>
>
>
> At 2023-12-28 21:37:54, "Dave Taht" <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> >In general my hope for the bufferbloat email list is to close the loop
> >between industry, open source, and academia. Academic authors (now
> >cc´d) have a tendency to not publish sources (?), and as the wait from
> >test to publication is so long, move onto other things, even if it is
> >a promising technique that could use further development and eyeballs.
> >Me, I wanted to know what wifi they tested for this, and do strongly
> >feel that slow start in the field is presently much larger than widely
> >recognised in academia coming from various cdns.
> >
> >On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 5:17 AM Sebastian Moeller <moeller0 at gmx.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> What I am missing in this and similar papres are tests what happens if the proposed scheme is actually used quantitatively over the internet...
> >> The inherent idea seems to be if one would know the available capacity one could 'jump' the cwnd immediately to that window... (ignoring the fact the rwnd typically takes a while to increase accordingly*). My gut feeling tells me this will make dynamics at bottleneck queues even more volatile, not sure whether that will result in an overall better outcome.
> >> te
> >> Sidenote: this is again a packet pair method with a side helping of "delay" increase measurements (inside the driver stack, so conceptually related to BQL/AQL) so the challenges are all the same.
> >>
> >>
> >> *) Finally, the rwnd selection module is used to determine whether the value of receiver window (rwnd) embedded in the ACK packet should be ignored, according to the judgement whether it reveals the exhaustion of the receiver’s buffer, thus to remove the restriction of rwnd on slow start acceleration.
> >> Erm, I think this paper should have been rejected on this argument alone... this is exactly the mind set (I know better then my communication partner) that results in a non- or sub-optimally working internet... I wish that those that do not appreciate slow-start would leave their fingers off it.
> >> Not saying that slow-start is perfect, but if you ignore the components that make slow-start effective your replacement likely will not cut it. The fact that slow-strat gradually ramps up the cwin (and pretty aggressively) is one of its features and not a bug, as the alternative of jumping directly to the appropriate capacity for each flow requires an oracle... so a "perfect" solution is clearly out of reach and all we are talking about is different shades of "good enough" (and to repeat myself, whether a solution is good enough does not solely depend on whether the solution if implemented at a single end-node delivers "better" numbers for that end-node but also on its effect on the rest of the network).**
> >>
> >> **) I occasionally wish for a tit-for-tat scheduler that is generous at first but will "retaliate" if a flow abuses that generosity...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 28 December 2023 04:50:59 CET, Dave Taht via Bloat <bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I am very happy to be seeing various advances in slow start techniques.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Li-Lingang-2/publication/372708933_Small_Chunks_can_Talk_Fast_Bandwidth_Estimation_without_Filling_up_the_Bottleneck_Link/links/64d1a210806a9e4e5cf75162/Small-Chunks-can-Talk-Fast-Bandwidth-Estimation-without-Filling-up-the-Bottleneck-Link.pdf
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >--
> >40 years of net history, a couple songs:
> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9RGX6QFm5E
> >Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

-- 
40 years of net history, a couple songs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9RGX6QFm5E
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos