[Make-wifi-fast] bloat on wifi8 and 802.11 wg

[Dave Taht]

I wish I had gone to the 802.11wg  more regularly than I did. I only
gave one bloat related presentation in 2014, shipped the
make-wifi-fast code in 2016(?), and never went back. IETF ate all my
money and time. I just assumed they were all in the slipstream of
linux and openwrt. :/

I did have a great meetup a few weeks back with the former 802.11
chair (dorothy stanley, hi!!!) who is trying to recruit people to
participate in the wifi8 standard and perhaps some finishing touches
on wifi7. She gave a great update on the status of things at the
recent wifinow conference, but as there is a cost to that, perhaps she
can share her slides with us?

https://wifinowglobal.com/product/wi-fi-world-congress-usa-2024-sarasota-florida-presentations-pdf/?mc_cid=beb1b4a2ed&mc_eid=327a64ba92

On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:28 AM Livingood, Jason via Bloat
<bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> From: Starlink <starlink-bounces at lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of Rich Brown via Starlink <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> Reply-To: Rich Brown <richb.hanover at gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, May 8, 2024 at 07:33
> To: David Fernández <davidfdzp at gmail.com>
> Cc: starlink <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net>, bloat <bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> Subject: Re: [Starlink] [Bloat] L4S
>
>
>
> Let's split this thread and use this message to continue the discussion of L4S. Thanks
>
>
>
> On May 8, 2024, at 5:31 AM, David Fernández via Starlink <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> I have seen two consecutive RFCs to 9330:
>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9331
>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9332
>
>
>
> 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...)
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> David F.
>
>
>
> Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 08:46:03 -0400
>
> From: Dave Collier-Brown <dave.collier-Brown at indexexchange.com>
> To: starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem
> Message-ID: <3d6bdccf-e3d1-4f62-a029-25bfd1f458f5 at indexexchange.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> It has an RFC at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9330/
>
> 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.
>
> I suspect My Smarter Colleagues know more (;-))
>
> --dave
>
>
>
> On 2024-05-07 08:13, David Fernández via Starlink wrote:
> Is L4S a solution to bufferbloat? I have read that gamers are happy with it.
>
> Sorry, I read it here, in Spanish:
> https://www.adslzone.net/noticias/operadores/retardo-videojuegos-nokia-vodafone
>
> Regards,
>
> David F.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFWSyMp3xg&t=1098s Waves Podcast
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos