Re: [aqm] [tcpm] TCP ACK Suppression

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Sat, 10 October 2015 06:24 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 5EC9C1B30A7; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 lWgoZUU5X1QE; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nitro.isi.edu (nitro.isi.edu [128.9.208.207]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 753EF1B30A5; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.156] (cpe-172-250-225-10.socal.res.rr.com [172.250.225.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by nitro.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9A6OC0p025858 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:24:14 -0700 (PDT)
To: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
References: <5618005A.8070303@isi.edu> <70335.1444421059@lawyers.icir.org> <D23D8CA5.54DF5%g.white@cablelabs.com> <56183B49.4000506@isi.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510091511540.3717@nftneq.ynat.uz> <56183E93.1010308@isi.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510091528320.3717@nftneq.ynat.uz> <5618420E.9040609@isi.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510091628010.3717@nftneq.ynat.uz> <5618554F.3080103@isi.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510091716100.3717@nftneq.ynat.uz> <56185E44.9050702@isi.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510091910170.3717@nftneq.ynat.uz> <561891C3.90004@isi.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510092134190.15683@nftneq.ynat.uz>
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <5618AF0A.4010101@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:24:10 -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: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1510092134190.15683@nftneq.ynat.uz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MailScanner-ID: t9A6OC0p025858
X-ISI-4-69-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/sdmzVX4nVAnVLsJSn68fMrpRbaI>
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, touch@isi.edu, "mallman@icir.org" <mallman@icir.org>, "LAUTENSCHLAEGER, Wolfram \(Wolfram\)" <wolfram.lautenschlaeger@alcatel-lucent.com>, Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com>, "aqm@ietf.org" <aqm@ietf.org>
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: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 06:24:48 -0000


On 10/9/2015 10:58 PM, David Lang wrote:
> RFC3449 doesn't completely address the current situation, but it
> provides a very good place to start, and it seems to me that the
> solitions it explores to address the conerns that it (and you) raise are
> actually being addressed pretty completely. There are still some areas
> to talk about (ECN interaction for example) and we wshould be talking
> about those issues rather than arguing that the proposal violates holy
> writ.

I'm OK with the recommendations for the endpoints to modify their ACK
behavior, but still am concerned that stripping out ACKs in the middle
of the network is problematic for a number of reasons, only some of
which are addressed in RFC3449 (which also recommends against deploying
them in the general Internet, so if that's your justification then it's
very clearly in direct opposition).

Joe