IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [aqm] ACK Suppression

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Thu, 15 October 2015 15:13 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@gmail.com>
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 0853D1B3124 for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 iW1ufsWL09mv for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x243.google.com (mail-lf0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CDF1A891B for <aqm@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lfaz124 with SMTP id z124so1625777lfa.0 for <aqm@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=EjO7TtOhb6AgrvKp64TTZx+/H5nPEQj8HouIf5TtZ3A=; b=hk2VIzDbNSPISxT9QQCDnykHOrNoTW3GxAfkZ0JNPW44UivBsf/lGTO0Yih4hAaLZy 2wvdx47YPrJfsQY0bTxvRdmKP0UUg44XR8m7G7kDRatuG7Ql6yk9QNW/fI44vnbNWtkY 2BeIhqDBttWfFaxtrJZOSX/bgz3edcnrcIa3YWrIQ9PB+YkN30futMqXLpuezsys7cHs 5CGS6GHu0uTHgO6yomAMVSBO0B4GbZHgJjePWuE4nGGGwwkVIPvWTFWJIj9Sez5D8z3a bUY0XGOdQD/eairt9TVHLEJSMuMJAP0h6/NqLLRSHgPUXp78ZAglTlGBG0VnwR4WsLGe i7xg==
X-Received: by 10.25.41.79 with SMTP id p76mr3204810lfp.16.1444922006985; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (176-93-46-50.bb.dnainternet.fi. [176.93.46.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c193sm2149976lfc.41.2015.10.15.08.13.25 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
In-Reply-To: <1444921712.77674114@apps.rackspace.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:13:23 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <22566E6F-2846-42E2-8E17-141516339CF4@gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1487.1444233956.7953.aqm@ietf.org> <1444247538.3556484@apps.rackspace.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510072200590.8750@uplift.swm.pp.se> <1444251596.768725492@apps.rackspace.com> <CY1PR0301MB0649DB7A6DDE1840CCB0B485A8360@CY1PR0301MB0649.namprd03.prod.ou tlook.com> <CAGD1bZbnCfv9GZKJ=ub6aijCbxq_3=1a+_A8WFXP3oGa6r=Lzg@mail.gmail.com> <D2418E41.54F49%g.white@cablelabs.com> <5F2CA872-E891-4E53-9D52-B347966D0A8E@gmail.com> <1444921712.77674114@apps.rackspace.com>
To: dpreed@reed.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/fCUD8GKYMfBsoneQaxEfkMRCfgc>
Cc: Greg White <g.white@cablelabs.com>, Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>, "aqm@ietf.org" <aqm@ietf.org>, Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
Subject: Re: [aqm] 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: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:13:30 -0000

> On 15 Oct, 2015, at 18:08, dpreed@reed.com wrote:
> 
> Small packets shouldn't be supressed just because they are small... no ssh connections would work.

Of course not, that would be stupid.

But some network nodes do *prioritise* packets based solely on size, since (as a heuristic) latency-sensitive packets do tend to be small.  That’s what I was pointing out.

 - Jonathan Morton

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email