IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [conex] Accounting of ConEx signals

Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> Fri, 07 October 2011 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: conex@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: conex@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E1F721F889A for <conex@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 07:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.556
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id frcKve33ZqwQ for <conex@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 07:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF7B21F87FA for <conex@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 07:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iaby26 with SMTP id y26so5211612iab.31 for <conex@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 07:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/emFogM1ngdDLG0O2mGPRd13xEJSrNe5Je3XbOu7ciI=; b=BFdyMEX6KeBIc6hueCb8FMQVUPSW/qJo9M/+hN4WPHcD4bUJlV4AAL/g8QH+AGDV2Z G7rdIZqSp0VQ0+/ybGMEijCEGS9zjryH6jT70++SYBqjr1Q3dXz300kB28sF5rBGR8vJ tD8DqSvG+NvhGqCmqX/k/UfcuZcMawDECWqY0=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.43.52.136 with SMTP id vm8mr13262096icb.26.1317998753693; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 07:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com
Received: by 10.231.59.206 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 07:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20111007121612.GE2234@verdi>
References: <201110070115.27485.mkuehle@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de> <20111007000031.GD2234@verdi> <5FDC413D5FA246468C200652D63E627A108AABB2@LDCMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <20111007121612.GE2234@verdi>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 10:45:53 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: nZIYU2tbZ-Uren9ARUSSrLX4_Ds
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaZ-drv1WDzKPz_4W6mD37O2D6EnWVTQjUvH7_0FP7=v+g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: conex@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [conex] Accounting of ConEx signals
X-BeenThere: conex@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Congestion Exposure working group discussion list <conex.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/conex>, <mailto:conex-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/conex>
List-Post: <mailto:conex@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:conex-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex>, <mailto:conex-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:42:40 -0000

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 8:16 AM, John Leslie <john@jlc.net> wrote:
>
>   I just don't see the value in this WG "standardizing" how to charge.

don't disagree, but I'd point out that 'congestion' (or rather packet
drops) happen not just because of full pipes, often packet RATES
matter as well. So contributing to high packet rates (even on not full
interface by volume) can cause loss.

We had a, memerable, customer who ran their interface very hot from a
pps perspective while only being ~half full, they were regularly
unhappy with loss rates on that interface.

-chris
small fast packets are often as painful as large slow ones

v2.40.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status