Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression
Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Fri, 09 October 2015 06:43 UTC
Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 0EAD71B35ED; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 23:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.961
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.961 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 5w_OrAbyIkXs; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 23:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87C851B35E5; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 23:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id DF227A1; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:43:44 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1444373024; bh=fWNw1TX9/WKqOXCvxKZrRFHpmIithvRiM7Z+uCrRmns=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=zPNiQ9VHdGUuE1jAYYsJhrb0ewVNGLDikxHzQBq3q0jxo4P3ujRKRsYDtpE4zFtTY fP54kjRCaRaP1E/phFWstajkUX037bwx2IFQ5nhAg4ANFGnOb8ndfhqpzVWngkaTnE TNJWhtznNwT1aa/cXFkPsdkTyQu/3NdA24V88lE8=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA4A19F; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:43:44 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 08:43:44 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510082121550.2943@nftneq.ynat.uz>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510090827240.8750@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <mailman.1487.1444233956.7953.aqm@ietf.org> <1444247538.3556484@apps.rackspace.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510072200590.8750@uplift.swm.pp.se> <7A2801D5E40DD64A85E38DF22117852C8812629D@wdc1exchmbxp05.hq.corp.viasat.com> <06C46DC6-854F-4CDE-8C7B-745F3362FA9E@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510071411400.29851@nftneq.ynat.uz> <E2035448-E688-4EF3-8BF7-02132D72D511@cisco.com> <fa0080678adcd392a8dfa237cbd77e49.squirrel@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510082121550.2943@nftneq.ynat.uz>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/f6pVzNOGWnEHwlyjQYnWMzypJ_w>
Cc: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "dpreed@reed.com" <dpreed@reed.com>, "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, "aqm@ietf.org" <aqm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [aqm] [tcpm] 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 06:43:50 -0000
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015, David Lang wrote: > Ok, so it turns out that what we are talking about here is talked about > explicitly in section 5.2.1 of RFC3449. It warns of increased sender > burst sizes, but I really question if that's a valid concern in the > cases that we are talking about here. The choice in these cases isn't to > send more acks spaced out, but rather to send a lot of acks back to back > in one transmit slot vs one stretch ack per transmit slot. Exactly. And in my specific case, we're talking 20kPPS of data down, and 10kPPS of ACKs, over a medium that allows the modem to send a bunch of packets only once every few milliseconds. So there are two alternatives: You get approx 10-60 ACKs as a "train of ACKs" within 0.3 milliseconds, every 1-4 milliseconds. You get 1-3 ACKs within 0.1ms, every 2-3 milliseconds. These ACKs will acknowledge 16-32 packets at a time. By the nature of the beast, I'd say that this kind of medium implicitly will be able to handle the "bursts" we're talking about here, if you ACK 24-48kilobyte of data per ACK (when a middle box does ACK Suppression to remove intermediate ACKs), it's implicit that the medium designers know that they can handle a wirespeed burst of data that is the result of the ACKing of these fairly large number of bytes. But again, I question the wisdom in ACKing every 2 packets when the congestion window is in the hundreds of kilobytes and you're sending tens of thousands of packets per second. I suggested in another part of the thread that perhaps the host itself should do ACK suppression and don't send ACKs more closely together than once per millisecond or 1/10th RTT, whatever is lower. Perhaps the RTT value needs to be even lower, 1/25 of RTT or something. In my specific test, using once per millisecond or 1/25 of RTT would cut down the number of ACKs to around 2kpps instead of the 10kpps ACKs I see now, but it wouldn't cut it down to the around 500-1000 ACKs per second that the DOCSIS modem is cutting it down to... I think that as bandwidths go up, there are changes to TCP that can be done to make it work better, and reducing the frequency of ACKs sent depending on RTT and different window sizes might be a way forward. I fully believe there are cases where ACKing every 2 packets is exactly the right way to go, but when you're sending 1 gigabit/s over 100ms RTT and the medium itself clumps the packets together because that's what it does, then these ACKs don't carry the same information anymore and some of them could be optimized away (preferrably by the host stack) to spare upstream bandwidth and transmit opportunities. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression dpreed
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Agarwal, Anil
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Jonathan Morton
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression dpreed
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression dpreed
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression dpreed
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Christian Huitema
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Greg White
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Jana Iyengar
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Scharf, Michael (Michael)
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Bless, Roland (TM)
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Joe Touch
- Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression gorry
- Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Greg White
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Jonathan Morton
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Jana Iyengar
- Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression Simon Barber
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Simon Barber
- Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression David Lang
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Bless, Roland (TM)
- Re: [aqm] [tcpm] ACK Suppression Greg White
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression dpreed
- Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression Jonathan Morton