IETF Logo Mail Archive

[aqm] FQ-PIE? Re: working group status and rechartering vs. closing

grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au> Thu, 02 June 2016 01:21 UTC

Return-Path: <garmitage@swin.edu.au>
X-Original-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B09712D1CE for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 18:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.626
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k-y2hyQy84q6 for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 18:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gpo3.cc.swin.edu.au (gpo3.cc.swin.edu.au [136.186.1.32]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2D2B12D1A2 for <aqm@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 18:21:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [136.186.229.37] (garmitage.caia.swin.edu.au [136.186.229.37]) by gpo3.cc.swin.edu.au (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id u521LoxT011953 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:21:50 +1000
To: aqm@ietf.org
References: <74081931-bbc2-a3e1-4aac-5633306eecb0@mti-systems.com>
From: grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au>
Message-ID: <574F8A2E.2040302@swin.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 11:21:50 +1000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <74081931-bbc2-a3e1-4aac-5633306eecb0@mti-systems.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/FBLs6KFPEBEGIef706rIP30SX_g>
Subject: [aqm] FQ-PIE? Re: working group status and rechartering vs. closing
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for active queue management and flow isolation." <aqm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/aqm>, <mailto:aqm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/aqm/>
List-Post: <mailto:aqm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:aqm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm>, <mailto:aqm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 01:21:57 -0000


On 06/02/2016 00:10, Wesley Eddy wrote:
     [...]
>
> - Are the current couple of algorithms all that's needed for the Internet, or are there other algorithms building on these, learning from experience with them, or making other improvements which we should work on?  (e.g. we have the DualQ draft, and recently the GSP draft has been updated)

We recently implemented a hybrid FQ-PIE in FreeBSD's ipfw/dummynet context, which might be something to evaluate/document more fully in the future?

(Our version boils down to gluing the FlowQueue hashing+newflow queue assignment logic from FQ-CoDel with per-queue instances of PIE.  Code went into FreeBSD-CURRENT a few days ago, https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=300779. All being well, the code will be in FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE later this year.)

I know there was a Linux FQ-PIE proof-of-concept discussed here many moons ago, but I don't know its current disposition.

cheers,
gja

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email