[Cake] [Bloat] Two questions re high speed congestionmanagement anddatagram protocols

[David P. Reed]

How to find a kernel maintainer to care about DCCP, seems to be the question for Linux.
I am tempted... Not to get involved with IETF "barriers" (what a mess, given the folks in IETF who resisted in AQM, I wouldn't last a minute), but to keep DCCP support alive.
The barrier here is getting accepted as a Linux maintainer, which is a different issue entirely, looking at my last two experiences with submitting simple bug fixes to the kernel, which were nightmares. I don't have the commitment to become accepted as a maintainer.
But it seems good to maintain DCCP, despite its lack of popularity as an IETF standard. It does deal with CC in a way that simplifies use of UDP for serious work.

(One such nightmare can be seen in LKML... Search for dpreed at deepplum.com patch emails. I tried hard, was worn down, then gave up, since I found a way to avoid the bug, in virtualization code on x86, and gave up on getting it fixed after a year. Life is too short. The prior one was almost 20 years ago when Alan Cox showed his asshole side, insulting me and HP. Alan is, thank goodness, gone now from Linus's inside circle)


-----Original Message-----
From: "Dave Taht via Cake" <cake at lists.bufferbloat.net>
Sent: Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 10:03 pm
To: "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen at networkplumber.org>
Cc: "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen at networkplumber.org>, cake at lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] [Bloat] Two questions re high speed congestionmanagement anddatagram protocols

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-ccwg/

is a new wg intended to poke into these issues

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 4:49 PM Stephen Hemminger via Cake
 wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 12:47:01 -0700 (PDT)
> David Lang  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Jun 2023, David P. Reed via Bloat wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry for top posting, but ... Bigger question:
> > > Why would DCCP be deprecated by Linux kernel?
> > > Who makes that decision? Who argues against it?
> >
> > Linus or the networking maintaners make the decision.
> >
> > Usually things get pulled from the kernel because there are updates that need to
> > be made to the code (to match changes elsewhere in the kernel or because of
> > security issues) and there isn't a maintainer who works on the code in a
> > resonable time. This means that the maintainers for the general code area (in
> > this case networking maintainers) will need to do extra work in an area they
> > aren't that interested in (and, especially in the case of hardware, may not have
> > the ability to test). They do some of it, especially if it's commonly used, but
> > eventually either another maintainer steps up, or it goes away
> >
> > David Lang
>
> See https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20230614194705.90673-3-kuniyu@amazon.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake



-- 
Podcast: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7058793910227111937/
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
_______________________________________________
Cake mailing list
Cake at lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake