Re: [aqm] [tcpm] TCP ACK Suppression

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Fri, 09 October 2015 22:10 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C0921B4DAE; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.31
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 196X0oH95NLQ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2178F1B4DB4; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.211] (mul.isi.edu [128.9.160.211]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t99MAH4j004008 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com>, "mallman@icir.org" <mallman@icir.org>
References: <5618005A.8070303@isi.edu> <70335.1444421059@lawyers.icir.org> <D23D8CA5.54DF5%g.white@cablelabs.com>
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <56183B49.4000506@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:10:17 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D23D8CA5.54DF5%g.white@cablelabs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/eeRXmPz9sYdV_y9k9TITrPj3vak>
Cc: David Lang <david@lang.hm>, "LAUTENSCHLAEGER, Wolfram \(Wolfram\)" <wolfram.lautenschlaeger@alcatel-lucent.com>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "aqm@ietf.org" <aqm@ietf.org>, touch@isi.edu
Subject: Re: [aqm] [tcpm] TCP ACK Suppression
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 22:10:36 -0000


On 10/9/2015 3:02 PM, Greg White wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/9/15, 2:04 PM, "Mark Allman" <mallman@icir.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>>> 1) *you* shouldn't be using a mechanism that destroys information for
>>> others
>>> 2) *you* don't know where your mechanism will have an impact
>>> 3) you claim this might be safe *if* AQM is widely deployed
>>
>> tl;dr summary: myopia is why we can't have nice things
> 
> Too true.  DOCSIS would have been much cleaner if we didn't have to deal
> with the fallout from the myopic TCP designers.  :-P

Wouldn't it have been cleaner with more appropriate network provisioning?

Why are you blaming TCP?

A DOCSIS router ought to route. If it left the packets alone, IMO we'd
all be better off.

Joe