IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [core] CoAP for high throughput applications

"Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com> Mon, 04 April 2016 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.fossati@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A76012D8D3 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 15:46:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.921
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-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 xlsQvaWq9w5i for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 15:46:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDC4E12D5E4 for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 15:46:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 2582632867444; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:46:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u34MkGYm016840 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:46:16 GMT
Received: from FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.112]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u34MkFgQ030770 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 5 Apr 2016 00:46:15 +0200
Received: from FR711WXCHMBA08.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.4.8]) by FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.112]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 5 Apr 2016 00:46:16 +0200
From: "Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com>
To: EXT Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Thread-Topic: [core] CoAP for high throughput applications
Thread-Index: AQHRjr76eON/nMwwHUq4G5ODCqR3Gp96QgsA///UMQA=
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 22:46:15 +0000
Message-ID: <D328743C.62C97%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <D32866D3.62C58%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com> <5702E93E.3030005@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <5702E93E.3030005@tzi.org>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.2.160219
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.41]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <EE5F91E4FB20B34C9004703B8EABA640@exchange.lucent.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/0514APunlowBwIXMb-Yv861de5g>
Cc: "core@ietf.org" <core@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [core] CoAP for high throughput applications
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 22:46:20 -0000

Hi Carsten, thanks for the quick reply.

On 04/04/2016 19:22, "EXT Carsten Bormann" <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>> A slightly off-topic question -- though not too much, hopefully.
>> 
>> One of the LURK [0] proposals is draft-cairns-tls-session-key-interface
>>[1].
>> 
>> In Section 7.1.2 [2] the authors propose to transport the LURK payloads
>> over CBOR/CoAP (over DTLS/UDP, I guess).
>
>Interesting.
>
>> Now, a single LURK box could have to handle lots of these requests,
>> potentially in thousands per second, whereas CoAP's default congestion
>> control algorithm parameters [3] are, by design, way too conservative to
>> be suitable for high-throughput use cases.
>
>That would be an interesting application for CoCoA...

Is CoCoA available if I'd want to test it?

>> Is there anyone that has played with CoAP for high-throughput
>> applications who'd be willing to share his/her experience with the group
>> and the wider IETF community?
>
>I think Matthias Kovatsch' Californium still is the record holder for
>responses per second from a Web Server (a term that I take to include
>both servers for CoAP and for one of the HTTPs)...
>
>The 16-bit message ID is only good for ~ 10^3 requests per second, so a
>client that needs a higher rate from a single server would need to use
>multiple port numbers.

I haven't re-done the maths, but the CoAP spec has a slightly lower number:

  "[...] The Message ID
   is compact; its 16-bit size enables up to about 250 messages per
   second from one endpoint to another with default protocol
   parameters.)"

Cheers, t

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email