<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;
panose-1:2 11 0 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \(Body CS\)";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word;-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;line-break:after-white-space">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Dropping Starlink as Bloat is the right list. The IEEE 802.11 domain is certainly different than IP, so typical IP CCs don’t apply. In our L4S/NQB trials, we put LL-marked packets into the AC_VI WMM queue
in the Wi-Fi network. IMO there is more work in 802.11 to focus on latency – so much focus right now is on throughput over everything else.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Starlink <starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of Rich Brown via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>Rich Brown <richb.hanover@gmail.com><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, May 8, 2024 at 07:33<br>
<b>To: </b>David Fernández <davidfdzp@gmail.com><br>
<b>Cc: </b>starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Starlink] [Bloat] L4S<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let's split this thread and use this message to continue the discussion of L4S. Thanks<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On May 8, 2024, at 5:31 AM, David Fernández via Starlink <<a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I see that L4S is not really solving everything (I read about issues with Wi-Fi), although it seems to be a step in the right direction, to be improved, let's hope.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">At least, Nokia is implementing it in its network gear (for mobile operators), so the bufferbloat problem is somehow acknowledged by industry, at least initially or partially.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have seen two consecutive RFCs to 9330:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9331__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!CGA-mCO2vy_CR16TDfs22u-WM8rcRFi2Ax_22LWAWzLou29azIk9NBy9j65tVl4MM1gfanuytPoVI9c-EGdmsUeJx9ShJwX6Dw$">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9331</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9332__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!CGA-mCO2vy_CR16TDfs22u-WM8rcRFi2Ax_22LWAWzLou29azIk9NBy9j65tVl4MM1gfanuytPoVI9c-EGdmsUeJx9RJkEV4wA$">https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9332</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I suspect that optimal results require the bufferbloat to be addressed not only at network layer (IP), but also with some pipelining or cross-layering at link level (Ethernet, Wi-Fi or any other link technology, such as 5G, SATCOM, VHF...)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">David F.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 08:46:03 -0400<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">From: Dave Collier-Brown <<a href="mailto:dave.collier-Brown@indexexchange.com" target="_blank">dave.collier-Brown@indexexchange.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:3d6bdccf-e3d1-4f62-a029-25bfd1f458f5@indexexchange.com" target="_blank">3d6bdccf-e3d1-4f62-a029-25bfd1f458f5@indexexchange.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"<br>
<br>
It has an RFC at <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9330/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!CGA-mCO2vy_CR16TDfs22u-WM8rcRFi2Ax_22LWAWzLou29azIk9NBy9j65tVl4MM1gfanuytPoVI9c-EGdmsUeJx9R7SZLUsg$" target="_blank">
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9330/</a><br>
<br>
I read it as a way to rapidly find the available bandwidth without the TCP "sawtooth". The paper cites fc_codel and research based on it.<br>
<br>
I suspect My Smarter Colleagues know more (;-))<br>
<br>
--dave<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2024-05-07 08:13, David Fernández via Starlink wrote:<br>
Is L4S a solution to bufferbloat? I have read that gamers are happy with it.<br>
<br>
Sorry, I read it here, in Spanish:<br>
<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.adslzone.net/noticias/operadores/retardo-videojuegos-nokia-vodafone__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!CGA-mCO2vy_CR16TDfs22u-WM8rcRFi2Ax_22LWAWzLou29azIk9NBy9j65tVl4MM1gfanuytPoVI9c-EGdmsUeJx9Ro1nvoFA$" target="_blank">https://www.adslzone.net/noticias/operadores/retardo-videojuegos-nokia-vodafone</a><br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
David F. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
Starlink mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net">Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!CGA-mCO2vy_CR16TDfs22u-WM8rcRFi2Ax_22LWAWzLou29azIk9NBy9j65tVl4MM1gfanuytPoVI9c-EGdmsUeJx9QRv1i0VA$">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>