From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFEB13CB37 for ; Wed, 8 May 2024 05:32:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2e3f6166e4aso37127021fa.1 for ; Wed, 08 May 2024 02:32:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1715160727; x=1715765527; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7myeMVcMDqX+7RiTVs5zUvaG8IXRxc01zLB2JyPMiiI=; b=jQFmsHDtxNpwpD5TmJj5H7dbddp9AQDPK+pBXpyf2wpsslhLr/6TTVbrE/rZEhW08k gjeiXbwp+lfIacjnWS9bauQNnlK8S4t+EgYh0vWKcJPzuhDDUX5709LQ5wnXlr9bG4d6 40Tht1wPccJjdoEyNJTIJ/LxRx2ZgOBUt/dmR0/G5IeAtLFvhE+vkgT2R6L00ZiKLZhQ E+B8yxVzGst75Q04wkYJgsgZJyyohWEEwsrd38MxVFNFyulHUQbJ4uechoU6Odzcsb84 1mcC4TNN7nckXpM7GymC2EWRHpW7cJHn1hIPd7jkjuqf0oX5z0ZjCueMiN00GbRQueJj QHSg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1715160727; x=1715765527; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7myeMVcMDqX+7RiTVs5zUvaG8IXRxc01zLB2JyPMiiI=; b=LbhOiVMA1ECz21DU834jhV6lY2iuPZTHSlTFQmc9JvlNOMlgwVaw4MhcYIAusLfhP/ 0QUHCjPOADGjtaAE8GZMCe2Hf9WytAOMz7Akr6bpaIYVBmJFvFPoBi784pxWQ4bugieH pRBz65DCqhSbNkpyd8uU5Az19RrWcpA3sntNIelzEpScIWD4o9JcwGslJsLtxkDsk8Q+ zqtqLm3Zn3RtslMq427HQr1+c0ragIric0DPuIRcCZAj6TGWoeIVAbBKFcNc1W6mCYPM fwR+5rUknNSnviGKA37XpSV8n6tukSEyjKYs0BxH/g8Ba0KP3qQKWtfrujQtULiaQ+MW 5RDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz4tLyegcvGqQAvI0IWfX2wDolFMrh5jGhcjBfEqXcEV2rMNVGz z/KiIuk7DZryh9la+R00gGpO5SJAirYhlbLgG5tjOqRzYIZIdxGJoQfQ1irUgTuW/cJ8ZjmEnng /9D4adaF0htvSqrMgyJH/kBwVdhePW7Wgl5eOmg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGN8DQ5Iqe4rKPz63N2UQCCh4yzJna3hY9oExUQlp9VZHpN3+24doZ168HIZBXW75YUGMThdIbQ+YzXM6TQrzI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:105b:b0:2e0:c363:f9dc with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2e4476990d8mr15692111fa.40.1715160726537; Wed, 08 May 2024 02:32:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: =?UTF-8?Q?David_Fern=C3=A1ndez?= Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 11:31:30 +0200 Message-ID: To: starlink Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d694960617edf90e" Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 May 2024 09:32:08 -0000 --000000000000d694960617edf90e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem Message-ID: <3d6bdccf-e3d1-4f62-a029-25bfd1f458f5@indexexchange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"; Format=3D"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 Fern=C3=A1ndez 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-voda= fone Regards, David F. --000000000000d694960617edf90e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I see that L4S is not really solving everything (I re= ad about issues with Wi-Fi), although it seems to be a step in the right di= rection, to be improved, let's hope.

At least,= Nokia is implementing it in its network gear (for mobile operators), so th= e bufferbloat problem is somehow acknowledged by industry, at least initial= ly or partially.

I have seen two consecutive R= FCs to 9330:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9332<= /div>

I suspect that optimal results require the bufferb= loat to be addressed not only at network layer (IP), but also=20 with some pipelining or cross-layering at link level (Ethernet, Wi-Fi or any other link technology, such as 5G, SA= TCOM, VHF...)

Regards,

David F.

Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 08:46:03 -0400
From: Dave Collier-Brown <dave.collier-Brown@indexexchange.com> To: sta= rlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't = a problem
Message-ID: <3d6bdccf-e3d1-4f62-a029-25bfd1f458f5@index= exchange.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8"; Format=3D"flowe= d"

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=20 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 Fern=C3=A1ndez 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.
--000000000000d694960617edf90e--