[EToSat] Things needed for QUIC to work well over satellite...

"Border, John" <John.Border@hughes.com> Tue, 26 March 2019 16:48 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=1988df47b0=john.border@hughes.com>
X-Original-To: etosat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: etosat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888C91206BD for <etosat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:48:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.85
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.85 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.85, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hughes.com header.b=NWFy3w4t; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hughes.com header.b=xSNeyW44
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 dJVucVZGJtAm for <etosat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00115402.pphosted.com (mx0a-00115402.pphosted.com [148.163.150.3]) (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 99AB812068A for <etosat@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0118426.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00115402.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2QGlfCZ031263 for <etosat@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:48:54 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hughes.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : content-type : mime-version; s=3152018; bh=djhAp05ilRzA2MJpfuVL+2JoFeL014TYeL34lhK9VRI=; b=NWFy3w4tUedKKGCj9SUh79RExSZuCVCB0jYi1wJfUAUgXWm6o3YsxTIbQ7FNHNR0dhyi pEmEL3NpJpscbPR/w0KX1Se4d5aDiXrVfvqXxBDI91o4KrB7EHDVCIQAss6zp3oVZDPw LHCozNRQWNEBbNk5+x6EJ1Jewt/0DfYt3ZlaerH1384AUzakq8pm9cz18zwErQ+RArUo x5Fz56gbLK3rQBp9npe2QUeVypw5CJgUZfvTdiYwW/9zXeCB0BmKNU2jgWwzHPa9zak1 h0W2mKt4wcxhyORbk+R5t9lfeTJHJWlG4kHFqv7pqDWTXGJd8+qLgnVxm6jLp7Tib47n 7w==
Received: from nam02-cy1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-cys01nam02lp2055.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.37.55]) by mx0a-00115402.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rf365q1mr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <etosat@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:48:53 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hughes.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=djhAp05ilRzA2MJpfuVL+2JoFeL014TYeL34lhK9VRI=; b=xSNeyW44grv1RvU5cU/HizydCgnj1SNfinUJEP//xrvEd6xVo8gIQEk3oF37h+URHoNgtd77c5P+2JW3u+T5Kzi7VIzyJSUxi+BxpU49jF5prx0UDuywTNFj9cOrpl5oMZZAcuLlaMvcNJS7+9VCOKHmWBaJ5392pdqZiFjqmVs=
Received: from BL0PR11MB3394.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.167.240.87) by BL0PR11MB3395.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.167.240.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1730.19; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:48:50 +0000
Received: from BL0PR11MB3394.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4c34:8995:92f3:5e3]) by BL0PR11MB3394.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4c34:8995:92f3:5e3%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1750.014; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:48:50 +0000
From: "Border, John" <John.Border@hughes.com>
To: "etosat@ietf.org" <etosat@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Things needed for QUIC to work well over satellite...
Thread-Index: AdTj8EOe/4lUCg1jRzaDIyOuyPDOuQ==
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:48:50 +0000
Message-ID: <BL0PR11MB339463EC5EDE352B558CC816905F0@BL0PR11MB3394.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [139.85.223.11]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a1c4c948-b927-46c3-ffb8-08d6b20aec4b
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:BL0PR11MB3395;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BL0PR11MB3395:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BL0PR11MB3395D4F306FC9EFC1FDEA788905F0@BL0PR11MB3395.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 09888BC01D
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(136003)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(346002)(366004)(189003)(199004)(14454004)(25786009)(7736002)(71190400001)(72206003)(486006)(3846002)(790700001)(6116002)(5640700003)(256004)(478600001)(2501003)(316002)(71200400001)(33656002)(74316002)(5660300002)(9686003)(2906002)(6916009)(6306002)(81166006)(55016002)(54896002)(7696005)(81156014)(6506007)(186003)(26005)(102836004)(99286004)(1730700003)(476003)(2351001)(105586002)(106356001)(66066001)(52536014)(561924002)(8936002)(6436002)(86362001)(53936002)(8676002)(97736004)(68736007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BL0PR11MB3395; H:BL0PR11MB3394.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: hughes.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: K2R/BIRAPrzkfeQWd4qjoGiKzsMMOHrJnkZHsNNjA7kVQRhOXZtgl2JDciTKQOEQV1ZTuNMbpr8FWdlPFrTMB/uCiQ4jxCAYZXf8dqa+QFsrnGvFLOn13QhDgTSH4GwzR0Fhm68rwNrHlxLT2OvxEgDvwYBxwgIJwg1nb5n9RMJVO9//ufc+NIEtg8QQkblqikOoD90sYkNGr97zfptyTyUBIfWrpR5xUr7yDwyf5nrnOqiadWhh77jvweiNItAttdyHqD8e4HD/gdwfdGQN/MT3DDwhQIkVipNDmu3LH1VttUPg9f3foNzdkMABW2rluM0rvItjir8g2nRHuIuFiXIr9BnP2F3W96je4o/LUStkT71Syq/DJcuBtl5E6xTSOYQ6hGcVr3f0ciJa2hNwZLcVuDnVVCTLUxsWfWqWuJg=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BL0PR11MB339463EC5EDE352B558CC816905F0BL0PR11MB3394namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hughes.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a1c4c948-b927-46c3-ffb8-08d6b20aec4b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Mar 2019 16:48:50.1833 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 0e1f3187-4610-4ce2-bad1-b92f4ba36ab3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL0PR11MB3395
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-03-26_11:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=810 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903260117
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/etosat/Z6nmZf7MgFW_DA6OZHgu_Ylh_mM>
Subject: [EToSat] Things needed for QUIC to work well over satellite...
X-BeenThere: etosat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The EToSat list is a non-WG mailing list used to discuss performance implications of running encrypted transports such as QUIC over satellite." <etosat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/etosat>, <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/etosat/>
List-Post: <mailto:etosat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat>, <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:49:05 -0000

    The discussion about the default response timeout at the QUIC meeting (and the fact that QUICv2 discussion is getting ready to start up) got me to thinking...

    Some things QUIC needs to work well over [geo] satellite...

Long enough timers.  The 1 second default with learning should cover this.

Big window size to support a large BDP.  State of the art throughput for spoofed TCP over satellite is at least 200 Mbps.  (And, it is growing with each generation of satellite technology.)  A RTT of 1 second means that 200 Mbps requires 200,000,000/8 = 25,000,000 bytes in flight.  While I keep forgetting to check, I am pretty sure QUIC can handle that number protocol-wise.  The question is will the implementations.  (Last time we looked a few months ago, gQUIC supported only a tenth of that, i.e. we maxed out at 20 Mbps.  Of course, two years ago, it was only 3 Mbps.)

Large initial window.  This will definitely require some memory because we need really big numbers that will (probably) not be safe to use in the general case.

A way to signal congestion.  Packet drop and ECN should work.  And, it is reasonable to expect good queue management.  The problem, though, is that a lot of the packet drop will actually not be congestion, especially during fade conditions.  We will need stuff under QUIC to try to minimize non-congestion packet drop.  Specific link layers will be have techniques and we can look at LOOPS-like approaches for applying techniques across larger portions of the path.

TBC

Besides retransmission, there is also the possibility of using FEC (as is being discussed in NWCRG) either under QUIC or inside of it.  For the inside version, we again need to learning to know when to use it.  The last version of Ian Swett's draft I read still required picking the FEC at startup.  It would be nice to figure out a way to turn it on after start-up...


John