Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-codel-09.txt

Dave Taht <dave@taht.net> Mon, 02 October 2017 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@taht.net>
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 D478D13479C for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 12:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 YdY5MsGtllFl for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 12:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:7028]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1794E1347AA for <aqm@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 12:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nemesis.taht.net (unknown [IPv6:2603:3024:1536:86f0:2e0:4cff:fec1:1206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AB52121425 for <aqm@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 19:13:50 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>
To: aqm@ietf.org
Cc:
References: <150673314895.3200.13535985478471790173@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 12:13:49 -0700
In-Reply-To: <150673314895.3200.13535985478471790173@ietfa.amsl.com> (internet-drafts@ietf.org's message of "Fri, 29 Sep 2017 17:59:08 -0700")
Message-ID: <8760bxcqhe.fsf@nemesis.taht.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/j9rcRGAdG2m_eqyCNgFGCvv2ocw>
Subject: Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-codel-09.txt
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 19:13:55 -0000

I have reviewed this draft, and my only complaint is that the new text:

"Packets arriving at a full buffer SHOULD be dropped" is really jarring,
where it landed, in section 4.4.

If this MUST be discussed somewhere, I'd suggest opening a new section
for it entirely. Still... I'd suggest dropping this sentence entirely
and letting the fq_codel draft handle it.

There are, incidentally, several strategies for a dealing with a full
buffer in a multi-queue system besides drop tail (which the above
appears to recommend for codel).

How fq_codel does drop on full, incidentally, has improved greatly since
we created the last version of the fq_codel draft, based on field
testing.

https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/617307/

And I'd be willing to update some future fq_codel.bis document to
reflect that.

...

I like the new definitions section.

...

Aside from that, I have not looked at this in going on two years, and
bits are falling out of date, and NONE of my nits are substantive
enough to warrant holding up publication a microsecond longer. It's a
*experimental* draft, not a standard.

If we want to discuss how to produce a fq_codel.bis and codel.bis, and
for that matter pie.bis and fq_pie.bis... on standards track, one day, great.

internet-drafts@ietf.org writes:

> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Active Queue Management and Packet Scheduling WG of the IETF.
>
>         Title           : Controlled Delay Active Queue Management
>         Authors         : Kathleen Nichols
>                           Van Jacobson
>                           Andrew McGregor
>                           Janardhan Iyengar
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-aqm-codel-09.txt
> 	Pages           : 25
> 	Date            : 2017-09-29
>
> Abstract:
>    This document describes a general framework called CoDel (Controlled
>    Delay) that controls bufferbloat-generated excess delay in modern
>    networking environments.  CoDel consists of an estimator, a setpoint,
>    and a control loop.  It requires no configuration in normal Internet
>    deployments.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-codel/
>
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-aqm-codel-09
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-aqm-codel-09
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-aqm-codel-09
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm